1. ' The petitioner was a Chowkidar employed by the Government Transport Service, Lyallpur. On the allegation that a certain com-pressure pump was lost from a depot of the Government Transport Service, Lyallpur, while the petitioner was on duty as a Chowkidar, he was charge-sheeted and dismissed after due inquiry into the allegation. The inquiry officer found' him responsible for the loss, although the pump was later found and restored. However, on an application moved by the petitioner under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, the learned Labour Court concerned directed his reinstatement with back benefits.
2. ' The view of the learned Labour Court was that the finding of the inquiry officer was only conjectural. However, on appeal by the District Manager, Government Transport Service, Lyallpur, the learned Appellate. Tribunal reversed the learned Labour Court's order and dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under section 25- A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance. Hence this writ petition.
3. ' It is to be noted at the very outset that the ground on which the learned Appellate Tribunal accepted the appeal is that "the possibility of the respondent himself (petitioner) being responsible for the dis-appearatice of the pump cannot be excluded". This observation by itself indicates that the petitioner's guilt had not been established and the possibility of his innocence could not be excluded, either. This is a case where there is no direct evidence to show that the petitioner bad a hand in the removal of the pump. Circumstantial evidence was not conclusive inasmuch as it was not inconsistent with the innocence of the petitioner. On the relevant date three Chowkidars including the petitioner changed shifts. And it was one of them who reported the pump missing. Therefore, the possibility of the informant being responsible for the disappearance of the pump could not be ruled out. At any rate the pump was found in the Transport Depot at.
4. Jhang where it in fact belonged. In these circumstances the learned Labour Court was justified in directing the reinstatement of the petitioner and the learned Appellate Tribunal had no authority to interfere with the decision of the learned Labour Court merely on the basis of a possibility of the petitioner being responsible for the disappearance of the pump. Sitting in appeal over the judgment of the learned Labour Court, the learned Appellate Tribunal certainly has the jurisdiction to reverse every finding of fact arrived at by the former and also to disagree with it on every question of law but no Court or Tribunal has the authority to pass a verdict on conjectural grounds.
5. This writ petition is accordingly accepted and the impugned order of the learned Appellate Tribunal is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The parties shall, however, bear their own costs.