' This appeal arises from the decision, dated 18th February, 1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 7, Gujranwala, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant was accepted and he was directed to be reinstated in service without back benefits. In the present appeal the appellant has claimed back benefits.
2. The allegation for which the appellant was dismissed was that he had remained absent from 7th July, 1980 to 21st February, 1981. He is alleged to have remained ill during the said period. He brought a fitness certificate with him on 22nd February, 1981 when he reported for duty, but the dismissal order was issued to him on 9th March.
1981. He was not charge-sheeted, nor any enquiry held against him. The learned lower Court reinstated the appellant for the reason that although the allegation was of misconduct against him, yet neither he was charge-sheeted nor any enquiry was held against him. Back benefits were not allowed to him for the reason that he had failed to communicate his illness to the employer.
The possibility cannot be excluded that if an enquiry had been held, the respondent may have proved that the appellant did not remain ill during the period he absented himself, therefore, only on technical ground the appellant has been reinstated which was that neither he was charge- sheeted, nor an enquiry held. This also can be said that if an enquiry had been held, the appellant may have proved that he had actually remained ill and was prevented for sufficient reason for not informing the employer about his illness. So nothing can be said what would have been the result if the enquiry had been held. In these circumstances, the appellant was rightly disallowed back benefits. There is no force in the appeal, which is dismissed in limine.