' In this appeal the decision, dated 29th May, 1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 3, Lahore at Ferozewala has been challenged, whereby the appellant was re- instated in service and the Managing Director was directed to pass fresh orders within two months.
It was further directed that if fresh order was not passed within two months, the appellant would stand re-instated with back benefits.
2. The defects pointed out by the learned lower Court were that disciplinary action was reduced to the form of a note which was read over to the Managing Director on telephone when the Managing Director was at Islamabad and he approved the dismissal. Direction has been given by the learned lower Court to the Managing Director to himself go through the enquiry proceedings and to record his own findings.
3. Learned counsel for the -appellant has argued that instead of giving direction for passing fresh order, fresh enquiry should have been ordered. I do not find any force in this argument. Since the learned lower Court found that the Managing Director had not applied his mind and had not himself perused the proceedings, therefore, he directed that fresh order be passed after going through the proceedings. The impugned order is just and proper and no interference is called for.
4. The appeal has no force and thus is dismissed in limine. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.