' In this appeal the decision dated 30th January, 1980 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad has been challenged, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his reinstatement in service was dismissed.
2. The allegation against the appellant was that he had issued tickets to the passengers from the students book. The case of the appellant is that instead of issuing regular RPT book, he was issued students book, therefore, he was compelled to issue tickets from the said book. There is no allegation that he had charged full fare from the passengers but entered half fare in the counterfoils. So no charge of dishonesty or misappropriation.
3. The other thing is that there was no justification for making ex parte enquiry as service of enquiry notice does not stand proved. Rehmat Ali, Clerk, who is alleged to have served the enquiry notice Exh. D. 1 was not examined before the learned lower Court. He was no doubt examined in the enquiry and said that he had delivered the notice to the appellant but this was not enough when the appellant was challenging the very ex parte proceedings. The appellant categorically denied the service of enquiry notice but despite of it, notice Exh. D. 1 was not put to him in cross- examination and he was not required about the signatures purported to be appearing on the document. His statement that no enquiry notice was served, therefore, went uncontroverted and should have been accepted by the learned lower Court.
4. As upshot of the discussion made above, the appeal is accepted and the appellant directed to be reinstated in service. However, he is not allowed back benefits in the circumstances of the case.