' The above captioned appeal arises from the decision, dated 28-3-1984 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 9, Multan, accepting the grievance petition of the respondent for his re-instatement in service with back benefits.
2. There were three-folds allegations against the respondent for which he was delivered three charge-sheets and two separate enquiries were held which culminated in a single composite order of dismissal. So far as charge-sheet Exhs. P.1, dated 28-8-1979 is concerned, the allegation is that the respondent abused. Mr. Wali Muhammad, Oil Incharge. Charge-sheet Exh. R.5, dated 20-9- 1979 contains the allegation that the respondent tampered with the attendance register and marked him present from 16th to 18th September, 1979. The third charge-sheet Exh. P.2 is to the effect that he remained absent without leave from 20-9-1979 to 30-9-1979. Joint enquiry was held in respect of charge-sheets Exh. R.5 and P.2. So, far as allegation of tampering with the attendance register is concerned, there is no direct or ocular evidence. Dilbar Hussain R.W. Did not say that he had seen the respondent marking himself present. There is no evidence of any handwriting expert that the marking is in the handwriting of the respondent. So the allegation stands disproved. So far as absence from 20-9-1979 to 30-9-1979 is concerned, the enquiry is defective. One of the defence witnesses was Ghulam Ali but his statement was recorded in the absence of the respondent as is evident from the enquiry proceedings. On 11th the statement of Ghulam Ali was recorded and it is recorded in the proceedings that the respondent had not turned up. On the same date the section 35(5) (d) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. They have also been authorised to exercise powers, conferred upon them by any other law. Since the Labour Courts hear appeals under section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act read with section 35(5) (d) of Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969, the orders are subject to revisional powers of this tribunal.
3. As a result the revision is accepted and setting aside the impugned orders of the learned lower appellate Court, the appeal is remanded for re-decision according to law.