' The decision dated 9th February, 1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 2, Lahore has been challenged in this appeal, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his re-instatement in service was dismissed.
2. The allegation against the appellant was that he came late and was called by the incharge, whereupon he abused and assaulted him. Only two points have been raised by the learned counsel for the appellant during arguments One is that the representative of the appellant was not awaited and the statement of first P. W. Was recorded in the absence of the said representative.
This is not the case of the appellant that the enquiry was started before time. If the representative of the appellant was late, the enquiry officer was not bound to wait for him. So this is no defect to vitiate the enquiry The second point is that according to the P. Ws. Some other workers were standing at a distance at the time of the alleged incident but none of them was examined as a witness. According to the learned counsel, they were independent persons. The names of the said persons were not disclosed, nor any question was put for their non-production. Since they were at some distance, they may not have heard the actual abuses. Moreover, the appellant could have very well produced them as defence witnesses. The appellant gave application Exh. P. 3 that his defence witnesses be summoned by the enquiry officer. The enquiry proceedings do not show that the appellant had disclosed the names and particulars of his defence witnesses. In the absence of the particulars of the witnesses, the enquiry officer was not in a position to summon them. The appellant could have brought them with him as he had not provided their addresses. So the argument is devoid of force. By the evidence recorded during enquiry, the offence was duly proved.
So, the appellant was rightly taken to task. He had no justification to abuse and assault his incharge. If no action is taken in such cases, the immediate officers would be unprotected and will not be able to keep the subordinates under control and to take work from them.
3. As upshot of the observations made above, I do not find any force in the appeal and dismiss the same.