NOOR ZAMAN, MEMBER .---- The petitioner contended in his petition that he was appointed /engaged in the respondent's establishment as Assistant on 06.06.1979, and was lastly posted at UBL, Peshawar Cantt, Branch; that he was rendering service since long in the respondent bank and was not regularized, therefore he served grievance notice on respondent for regularization/confirmation on 10.06.2009; that after receiving the grievance notice, instead of regularization, the petitioner was terminated without giving any reason; that against verbal termination the petitioner served another grievance notice on 12.05.2010 and having no response hence the petitioner filed his grievance petition before the Labour Court Peshawar on 03.06.2010 and later on after the promulgation of the IRA, 2012, change of jurisdiction, the petition was transferred to NIRC on 28.04.2014.
2. On notice the respondents bank submitted reply and rebutted the contentions of the petitioner and stated that the petitioner has never remained in service of the bank. The employee card presented by the petitioner is fake. It is stated that the petitioner was employee of one M/s Afridi Trading, University Road Peshawar which company is an old customer of respondent bank, therefore the petitioner used to come to the bank on behalf of M/s Afridi Traders and that the petitioner operate his own account along with his wife in Regi Lalma Branch of the respondent bank where salary is transferred from account of M/s. Afridi Traders.
3. After receipt of defence reply the case was put up for recording pro and contra evidence which was duly recorded and then the case was fixed for arguments.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended in his arguments that the petitioner was appointed by the bank as godown keeper who performed duties with the clients of the bank. He also performed duties in bank. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred EX PW-3/1 and 3/2, which is an employee's card, issued by the United Bank Limited. He also produced a copy of an email 19.03.2014 of District Customer Service Manager Peshawar Cantt UBL to Regional Head Quarter Peshawar to register the petitioner with Police Foundation being employee of good reputation and completed more than 05 years service. Learned counsel also referred to letter dated 15.02.1997 where the Peshawar Cantt Branch has written to Assistant Vice President UBL RHQ Peshawar regarding monthly statement of causal labour , and petitioner has been shown as. Godown Keeper with M/s. Kaghan Ghee from 06.06.1979 to 28.04.1992. He also referr ed a letter by Circle Executive dated 05.03.1993 to Executive Exchange UBL Peshawar forwarding request of casual labour for confirmation and petitioner has been shown at serial No.05 of the list who is working with M/s. KK & CO on behalf of respondent bank. Learned counsel for petitioner also referred to some Bank deposit Slips which are signed by the petitioner being official of the bank. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been in service of the responde nts for more than 20 years and has attained the "status of permanent workman therefore he may be reinstated' with back benefits.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that the petitioner has never remained in service of respondents; that he was employee 'of one M/s. Afridi Trading and used to visit bank on his behalf. He further argued that he has never been issued appointment letter by respondent and never paid any salary by the bank; that the service cards are fake and the email regarding Police Foundation is also fake. The documents regarding his engagement as casual labour in the bank are unauthoritative and mere copies and no original of these letters have been produced in evidence. He further argued that the petitioner has not any cogent proof of his link with bank and that the deposit slips he claimed to sign have not been found in bank record; that the salaries to petitioner have been paid by M/s. Afridi Traders and not the Bank; that he remained Godown Keeper , employed by borrower of the bank and paid by the borrower . However petitioner is not employee of the Bank, hence no question of his termination arise. The petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. Arguments heard and record perused.
7. The learned counsel for respondents admitted that the petitioner has been godown keeper of pledged godowns and was employee of owners of such godown and paid by them and he was never employee of the Respondent's Bank. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has been working godown keeper with different clients of the Bank, like with M/s KK & Co. in 1991 as shown in page 77 of the petition that vide order dated 25.06.1990 the petitioner has been transferred by the respondent bank to pledged Godown at M/s. Saif Beverages, Ltd Industrial Estate Peshawar , Likewise a letter dated 30.03.1 995 issued by respondent showing list of casual labour containing name of petitioner at Serial No.5 detailed with M/s. Frontier Woolen Mills Ltd. A monthly statement show that the petitioner is include in list of Godown Keeper with M/s. Kaghan Ghee Mills from 06.06.1979 to 28.04.1992. And lastly as admitted by respondent he was posted with M/s. Afridi Traders.
8. I have researched the mechanism of godown of pledged commodities and have been informed that the Financial Institutions extend loan facilities to traders, Mills against pledging their assets. Godown of such pledged commodities are looked after by Godown Keepers and Godown Chowkidars on behalf of Financial Institutions. One of Vice President of National Bank reported that the NBP used to hire their own Godown Keepers up to 1996, however later on godown keepers were outsourced and such was the case in all other banks also. The business transaction show that Godown keeper must be loyal to Bank as he is keeping eyes on pledged assets on behalf of Bank as it is in their interest because Banks have extended financial facility against the assets; contention of respondent that Godown Keepers are employees of owners of Pledge Assets is not plausible because, the owners of Pledged Assets will not safeguard assets of Bank. The petitioner has been Godown Keeper with various companies / traders on behalf of bank. If he was employee of a particular company as claimed by respondents how he switched over from one owner to other on behalf of the bank. Besides admissio ns of respondents that petitioner was Godown keeper , the petitioner provides copies of various documents which is sufficient proof of the fact that petitioner was performing duties with bank as daily wage/casual labour . Likewise a certificate dated 01.10.2004 at Pages 82 and 83 of the petitioner shows that it has been issued for Dowlance Appliances to petitioner that he was working with UBL Regi Lalma Branch and his monthly salary was Rs.5000/-. Similarly a certificate at Page 84 show him working as Assistant in UBL since 1982.
9. In view of above facts and circumsta nces it is proved without doubt that the petitioner has been performing duties continuously with the respondent bank since 1982 and he has attained status of permanent workman of the respondent. Hence the petition is allowed, the petitioner D is reinstated into service with full back benefits. No order as to costs. File be consigned to R.R.