This is an appeal under section 16 of the West Pakistan Industrial Disputes Ordinance. 1968 (hereinafter called the Ordinance), The learned Chairman of the Second "7eest Pakistan Industrial Court, Karachi, had ordered the re-instatement of the respondent with all back benefits on the ground that the respondent being a temporary Conductor could not be removed from service on the ground of misconduct, without being charge sheeted.
2. Mr. Sirajul Haq Qureshi, the learned Representative for the Government Transport Service, contended, relying on A. W. 1/1, that the respondent was only a badli. I have gone through A. W. 1/1. It clearly states that the respondent was on the waiting list and was temporarily appointed as a Conductor in place of Muhammad Isa, who was promoted as a Booking Clerk. It is true that A. W. 1/1, mentions that the services of the respondent could be terminated "as and when above `officials resume their duty on or before earlier without assigning any cause". The admitted position is that the services of the respon--dent were not terminated when Muhammad Isa reverted as Conductor. The respondent continued as temporary Conductor till 1st May 1968. It cannot, therefore, be said that the services of the respondent were terminated on or before Muhammad Isa reverted as Conductor. The settled position in law is that even a temporary employee, when dismissed for misconduct, had to be charge-sheeted.
3. The operative portion of the order of the learned Indus--trial Court is as under :- "I accordingly order the re-instatement of the appellant with all back benefits."
This, the learned Court should, not have done. He should have ordered that the respondent be re- instated and that it was open to the department to charge-sheet the respondent. If the respondent was found to be guilty, he would not have been entitled to any back benefit. On the other hand, if he was; exonerated, he would have received his back pay from the data of his dismissal from service to the date of his re-instatement. In the present case, however, it is conceded by Mr. Sirajul Haq Qureshi, to which Mr. Wasiullah Qureshi agrees, that the depart--ment would re-instate the respondent and treat his absence as leave without pay. I modify the order of the learned Industrial, Court to this extent that the respondent will be re-instated without any back benefit.