DISTRICT MANAGER, PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT

JUDGMENT'

The decision dated 12‑10‑1986 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.1 Lahore has been challenged in the appeal captioned above, whereby back benefits have been allowed to the respondent from 21‑12‑1983, when he had reported for duty after being released from jail to 13‑10‑1984 when his departmental appeal for re‑instatement was accepted.

2. The respondent was challenged for rash and negligent act and was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for six months. He reported for duty on 21‑12‑1983 when he was released from jail but he was dismissed from service. The order of dismissal was withdrawn accepting the appeal of the respondent and the period of absence from duty was treated as leave without pay. Before the learned lower Court the respondent deposed that he had remained jobless from the date he was removed from service upto the date when his departmental appeal was accepted and he was re‑instated in service. No evidence was produced in rebuttal. Even in cross‑examination it was not suggested to the respondent that he had remained employed elsewhere.

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that since in the departmental appeal back benefits were not claimed, therefore, the learned lower Court erred in allowing the same. This is true that in the memo of departmental appeal no claim about back benefits can be found but at the same time since the respondent did not give any undertaking that he would not claim back benefits, if the order of dismissal had been recalled, he was not debarred from bringing the application under section 25‑A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 for getting back benefits. Since the department itself came to the conclusion that the order of dismissal was not sustainable, the respondent could not be made to suffer for a wrongful order. He was ready and prepared to serve the appellant but was prevented on account of the wrong order of dismissal, which thereafter was recalled in the departmental appeal. The learned lower Court thus, rightly accepted the grievance petition of the respondent.

4. As a result, there is no force in the appeal, which is dismissed.

M.Y.H./332/Lb.P

Appeal dismissed.