DECISION This is an appeal filed by Karachi Transport Corporation against the impugned order, dated 22-1- 1985, passed by the Sind Labour Court No. IV, Karachi, who had allowed the grievance petition of the respondent, filed under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969.
2. The facts briefly stated are that the respondent has put more than 16 years' service as Driver with clean record of service with the appellant Corporation. That on 7-1-1984 he was issued charge- sheet wherein it was alleged that he had committed a misconduct by causing accident to Bus No.830-519 which caused death of 4 persons and injuries to others. That the respondent had challenged the misconduct on the ground that he was forced to drive the vehicle and the accident was not due to his carelessness or any negligence and the enquiry was based only on the evidence of one witness Mr. Fazal Elahi who was neither the eye-witness nor had any knowledge how the accident had occurred. That he was wrongly dismissed from service on the basis of such enquiry and that he was neither served with the second show-cause notice nor was given an opportunity of personal hearing. That being aggrieved with the above action of the appellant- Corporation the respondent submitted his grievance petition before the learned Labour Court.
3. The case of the appellant-Corporation before the learned Labour Court was that the respondent was served with the charge-sheet wherein the charge was that he caused the accident with Oil Tanker when he was unauthorizedly driving the Bus No.830-519 which was booked in the name of Driver, Taj Bareen. That the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Mitho Khan the respondent who after leaving Thatta, drove the vehicle without permission of the competent authority. That the respondent was given full opportunity to lead evidence which opportunity he availed. That the second show-cause notice could not be served upon the respondent as he absented himself and that it was sent to his home address which was also undelivered. That thereafter, on 17-6-1984 the respondent sent an application alongwith a medical certificate and an outdoor patient slip issued by the Jinnah Hospital, Karachi, showing that he .Was under the treatment, but he neither joined the duty nor sent any application upto the date of his dismissal.
That finally an ex parte decision was taken and the respondent was dismissed.
4. Both the parties submitted their respective affidavits in evidence and were duly cross-examined before the learned Labour Court. The learned Labour Court had allowed the grievance petition, hence this appeal.
5. I have heard Mr. Raza Hussain Hydri, the learned Advocate for the appellant- Corporation and Mr. Ch. Rasheed Ahmad, the learned counsel on behalf of the respondent and have perused the record and proceedings of the case.
6. Mr. Ch. Rasheed Ahmad, the learned counsel for the respondent. Mitho Khan, has relied a decision of this Tribunal in Appeal No.KAR-70 of 1985, decided on 5-2-1986 in the case of District Manager Karachi Transport Corporation v. Taj Bareen, in which the present respondent was also a co-accused alongwith Taj Bareen. Mr. Ch. Rasheed the learned counsel for the respondent has referred me to the observation of this Tribunal in that case as regards to the present respondent, as under: - "I believe that it was Taj Bareen who was driving all along the bus and not Mitho Khan. There was no need for Mitho Khan to drive the bus as Taj Bareen was attached to drive this bus for test."
7. Mr. Raza Hussain Hydri, the learned Advocate for the appellant- Corporation has nothing to submit in rebuttal of these observations. I, therefore, hold that the respondent was not guilty of the charge as alleged by the appellant-Corporation, and that the learned Labour Court has rightly allowed the grievance petition of the present respondent. I, therefore, maintain it and would dismiss this appeal.