1. ' The respondent who is a Meter Reader was suspended on 1st November, 1979 for an indefinite period for the reason that the reading of meter made by him was defective. He has been re- instated for the reason that according to Order 15 of Standing Orders Ordinance he could be suspended for 28 days only. It was observed that since the statement of the respondent that he had served grievance notice had not been rebutted and he was not cross-examined on the point, the service of grievance notice was proved. This notice was given before bringing the civil suit. The respondent was held to be a workman.
2. The respondent is employed in distribution of electricity, since he makes readings of energy consumed by the customers. He, therefore, falls in clause (xix) of Schedule II of section 2(a)
3. Workmen's Compensation Act and is excluded from the definitition of civil servant. He is not a manager or a supervisor and thus is covered by the definition of workman given in section 2 (xxviii) of I. R.
0. He reads from the meters the energy consumed and enters it in his reading book. Thus he does clerical work and is covered by the definition of workman according to section 2 (ii) of Standing Orders Ordinance, 1968. According to Order 15 (5) a workman can be suspended for the purpose of inquiry for 4 days at a time for a total period of 28 days only but in the present case the respondent was suspended for an indefinite period. So the order is void. Even according to WAPDA Rules an employee can be suspended for the purpose of inquiry only. No case of the appellant that any inquiry had been started. No evidence produced on the point was produced.
4. The respondent therefore, has been rightly re-instated. No force in the appeal which is dismissed.