MEHMOOD AHMAD BUTT vs GHULAM MURTAZA HASHMI and others
This petition arises from an order of the Lahore High Court dismissing a writ petition filed against the orders of the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and Punjab Labour Court. The petitioner, a bank employee, was dismissed for fraud and misappropriation, but was subsequently ordered to be reinstated by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal without back benefits. After protracted litigation up to the Supreme Court, the employee filed a complaint under the Industrial Relations Ordinance for non-implementation of the reinstatement order and non-payment of wages. The Labour Court accepted the complaint and the Tribunal dismissed the employer's revision. However, the High Court accepted the employer's writ petition and set aside those orders. The core legal question was whether the employee was entitled to service benefits for the period following his reinstatement order. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it, holding that the employee was entitled to his service benefits from the date of reinstatement without justification for withholding them. The key principle laid down is that an employee reinstated by a competent tribunal is entitled to the consequential service benefits unless lawfully withheld.
- Is an employee entitled to service benefits following reinstatement by a Labour Appellate Tribunal?
- Whether a complaint under sections 53 and 54 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1965 is maintainable for non-implementation of a Labour Court decision?
- Can service benefits be withheld during the pendency of proceedings when a reinstatement order has been passed?
- Section 25-A, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1965
- Section 38(3-A), Industrial Relations Ordinance 1965
- Section 53, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1965
- Section 54, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1965
- Section 55, Industrial Relations Ordinance 1965
' MUHAMMAD BASHIR JEHANGIRI, J.---This petition is directed Against the order dated 27-7-1998 whereby the learned Single Judge had dismissed Writ Petition No,18341 of 1977 filed by the petitioner on behalf of the Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd.
2. The factual background of the controversy, briefly stated, is that the petitioner was employed with Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd. Lahore, as a Cashier. He was dismissed from service on the charges of fraud and misappropriation of a huge amount. The petitioner challenged the order of his dismissal from service through a grievance petition filed under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1965), (hereinafter called as the Ordinance), before the Punjab Labour Court No,4, Faisalabad. But it was dismissed by its order dated 28-7-1988. Aggrieved from the aforementioned order passed by the Punjab Labour Court, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal, Lahore, which was accepted vide order dated 12-12-1988 whereby the petitioner was reinstated but he was deprived back benefits with effect from 2-2-1982 till his reinstatement on 12-12-1988. The petitioner-Bank filed Writ Petition against the order dated 12-12-988 passed by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal against the reinstatement of the respondent. The respondent also filed Writ Petition against the said order as the back benefits had not been allowed to him. The High Court, however, dismissed both the writ petitions vide order dated 11-5-1994. Feeling aggrieved, both the parties filed appeals with leave of this Court which were dismissed vide order dated 10-4-1997. As the respondents were not paying the benefits after his reinstatement in service, so he filed a complaint under sections 53 and 54 of the Ordinance before the Punjab Labour Court, Faisalabad. The Punjab Labour Court accepted the complaint and directed the respondent to make payment of the wages after the petitioner's reinstatement since 12-12-1988. The respondent feeling aggrieved of the aforementioned order, filed a revision petition under section 38(3-A) of the Ordinance before the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal which was, however, dismissed. Feeling still dissatisfied with the abovementioned orders dated 7-7-1997 and 22-7-1997, the respondents filed Writ Petition No,18341 of 1997 in the Lahore High Court, Lahore. It has been accepted by a learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court vide order dated 27-7-1998.
3. Mr. M.A. Zafar, learned Advocate Supreme Court, appearing in support of this petition, contends that the learned Single Judge in the High Court was not justified to have declared that the Punjab Labour Court directing the respondents to implement the decision of the Punjab Labour Court No,4, Faisalabad, in his revisional jurisdiction, inasmuch as under sections 54 and 55 of the Ordinance a Court was vested with the jurisdiction to compel the person not implementing a decision which he is required to implement under the order of the Punjab Labour Court.
4. Mr. M.A. Qureshi, learned Advocate-on-Record, representing the respondents has attempted to defend the impugned order and submitted that the order dated 12-12-1988 passed by the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal remained suspended during the period from 12-12-1988 to 10-4-1997 because of the order of this Court dated 10-4-1997.
5. We find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to service benefits from the period from 12-12-1988 to 9-9-1997 inasmuch as there is no justification to withhold the service benefits for the said period.
6. In the light of above what has been observed, we convert this petition into an appeal and allow it with the direction that the appellant would be entitled to his service benefits with effect from 12-12- 1988 to 9-9-1997 with no order as to costs.