TARIQ MUNIR CHEEMA Versus DAWOOD YAMAHA LTD., LAHORE

The decision dated 28‑1‑1984 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 2, Lahore has been challenged in this appeal, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant was dismissed.

2. The services of the appellant had been previously terminated but he was reinstated under the direction of the Court. He was in compliance with the order reinstated, but was transferred to Karachi on the plea that there was no post at Lahore. The appellant challenged the order of his transfer as mala ride. The ground for the termination of his services was that the sale of spare parts had been closed at Lahore and started at Karachi. The case of the appellant was that his duty was in connection with the sale of motor cycles and not spare parts. The appellant had pleaded mala fides, so unless opportunity had been afforded to him by the learned lower Court, to prove his plea and he had fatidic to establish it, his petition could not be brushed aside. This was not a fit case to be dismissed in limine. Needless to say that only that petition can be rejected which does not disclose any cause of grievance such as plaints are rejected under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. Since the case of the appellant is that his post exists and that there is work for him at Lahore and with mala fide intention he has been transferred to Karachi, the petition does disclose a cause of grievance.

3. As a result the appeal is accepted and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court, the case is remanded for decision on merits after affording proper opportunity to the parties to produce relevant evidence of their own choice.

A.E./1193/Lb. P.

Appeal accepted.