' By an order, dated 20-7-1983, the Labour Court No. V at Karachi, dismissed the grievance application under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969, filed by one Abdul Jabbar. This is an appeal against the said order.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was employed as typist in the United Bank Limited, Karachi, in September, 1971. On 3-2-1981, the explanation of the appellant was called regarding medical bills of Jan Muhammad, the Gunman. Thereafter the typist was directed to appear before Mr.Mumtaz Siddiqi, the enquiry officer on 4-4-1981, when the enquiry was adjourned to 8-4-1981 and also subsequently it was adjourned to a number of days, the last date was 3-5-1981. During the pendency of enquiry the appellant was given another charge-sheet, dated 26-4-1981 with regard to the medical bills for reimbursement by Messrs Fazlur Rehman, Muhammad Talib, Abid Hussain and Amanullah. In this enquiry one Muhammad Rehmatullah was appointed as enquiry officer on 26-5-1981. The enquiry resulted in the dismissal from service of the appellant (typist) on 5-7-1981.
3. The stand taken by the respondent-bank was that on 3-2-1981, the appellant was served with a charge-sheet with regard to certain bogus medical bills. Enquiry was held which was held from time to time when the medical bills of four employees, namely, Fazlur Rahman, Muhammad Talib, Abid Hussain and Amanullah were found, on scrutiny to be bogus and to be not signed by the Doctor of the bank. This typist was employed and posted at New Challi Branch of the respondent- bank at Karachi but he went round to different branches and promised certain persons that he will get their medical bills passed only if some remuneration is given to him. The medical bills of persons were passed with remuneration as alleged to have been given to the typist, Abdul Jabbar.
On scrutiny and investigation it was found that these prescriptions and bills were not signed by Dr. Jummani, the Medical Officer and in conjunction with one, Muhammad Aslam, sitting in the Clinic of Dr. Jummani, got stamped and forged signatures on those bills and got the encashments. This practice he was doing perhaps since many months and he was subsequently caught and enquiries were held and he was dismissed.
4. During the course of evidence before the learned Labour Court, the appellant filed his affidavit and he was cross-examined. The respondents filed affidavit of Muhammad Rehmatullah, the enquiry officer and he was also cross-examined. In this case, I have heard the learned counsel, Mr. Abid Hussain on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Iqbal Habib, Legal Officer of the respondent-bank.
The plea taken by the appellant, vide Annexure A-7, was that he took the bills of four employees, named above, and had gone to the clinic of Dr. Jummani but has submitted these bills to one Muhammad Aslam, sitting in the clinic of Dr.Jummani, and received back the bills stamped and signed by the Doctor and he submitted the same before the bank authorities for reimbursement.
His plea was that he did the social work. The affidavit of enquiry officer shows that these bills were sent to the relevant Doctor who wrote on those that these bills were carrying fake signatures and fake prescriptions. Even the prescriptions were false. The enquiry officer had examined four employees whose bills were said to have been produced for reimbursement. All these four employees implicated the appellant who managed to pass the bills and gave it to the bank for reimbursement. In cross-examination the appellant has not cut the good figure and he himself, according to Annexure A-7 has admitted the role that he has played in respect of those bills.
5. The learned Labour Court has come to the conclusion that these bills were forged and the appellant was responsible for the forged bills being reimbursed by the bank.
6. On the whole, the celebrated typist who was posted at New Challi Branch of the bank went round to the other branches of the respondent-bank and managed to get the social work which he did in a number of cases and he had received remuneration in conjunction of the assistant of Dr.Jummani and got those bills passed by forging the signatures of the Doctor. The evidence on record almost proves this fact and he was rightly dismissed. The Labour Court has assessed the evidence and annalysed it and has come to the proper conclusion.
7. There is no force in this appeal and it is accordingly dismissed.