' SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.--- This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 30-5-2002 passed by learned Presiding Officer Punjab Labour Court No,5, Sargodha whereby grievance petition brought by respondent was accepted.
2. Relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are that respondent was serving with appellant- Bank as Accountant and on 13-1-1998 he was served with charge-sheet. He filed reply but appellant found his reply unsatisfactory and regular inquiry was conducted against him. After receiving report of Inquiry Officer, respondent was dismissed from service on 17-7-1999. He served grievance notice and filed grievance petition. The respondent stated that dismissal order is mala fide and that inquiry is defective. The appellant mentioned in reply that respondent is not a workman, as he was serving as Grade-III Officer of the Bank. The appellant further mentioned that inquiry was conducted fairly and in accordance with law. The charge against respondent was proved, therefore, competent authority dismissed him from service. Learned trial Court recorded evidence and accepted the grievance petition brought by respondent vide judgment 30-5-2002. Hence this appeal.
3. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
4. As mentioned above Muhammad Iqbal Sipra, respondent was serving as Accountant with appellant-Bank but he was dismissed from service vide order, dated 17-7-1999. He served grievance notice and filed grievance petition. The appellant contested the case. Learned trial Court recorded evidence and accepted the grievance petition. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that respondent had not served grievance notice upon his employer rather he had served grievance notice upon appellate authority (Board of Directors through President Allied Bank of Pakistan, Head Officer Karachi) and he had filed appeal also before the said Board, therefore, grievance petition is liable to be dismissed on this score alone. He has relied upon the case of Khushal Khan v. Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd. And others 2002 SCM R 943 and Allied Bank of Pakistan Limited through Attorneys and 2 others v. Muhammad Bashir Khan 2006 PLD 39. The record shows that respondent served grievance notice (Exh.P.1) upon Board of Directors through President Allied Bank of Pakistan, Head Office Karachi. However, dismissal order (Exh.P.4) was passed by Secretary Disciplinary Action Committee Central Office, Karachi. The respondent had filed appeal (Exh.P.14) before Board of Directors through President Allied Bank of Pakistan, Head Office Karachi. So it is clear that respondent was aware about the fact that Board of Directors is the Appellate Authority but he served grievance notice also upon the Board of Directors. As such he has not served grievance notice upon employer (Appointing 'Authority). The Appellate Authority is always considered to be distinct and different from Appointing Authority. As such there is no valid grievance notice. Reliance can be placed on the case of Khushal Khan v. Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd. And others 2002 SCM R 943 and Allied Bank of Pakistan Limited through Attorneys and 2 others v. Muhammad Bashir Khan 2006 PLD 39. So in the circumstances of the case, I find that grievance petition brought by respondent is liable to be dismissed.
5. The upshot of the above discussion is that this appeal is accepted, impugned judgment is set aside and grievance petition brought by respondent is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.