' This is an appeal challenging the correctness of the decision dated 21-4-1988 recorded by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 7, Gujranwala, whereby the respondent has been directed to be reinstated in service with back benefits.
2. The respondent was employed as gagman on 1-1-1964. According to him, he on account of cutting a tree belonging to the Forest Department was challenged and convicted and fined Rs, 352.
On this ground the respondent is alleged to have been removed from service by an oral order. In the written statement it was admitted that the respondent was challaned but it is not admitted that he was fined and that on the ground he was either dismissed or his services were terminated.
On the record are the show-cause notice alleged to have. Been sent to the respondent for absence and discharged order on the ground that answer to the show-cause notice was not satisfactory.
However, this does not appear if the show-cause notice and the discharge order were ever served upon the respondent. There is nothing on the record to show that the appellant had discharged the respondent on account of being convicted in a criminal case. As the show-cause notice and the discharge order were not served and also were not exhibited in evidence and were only marked, the order of reinstatement appears to be correct. Wilful absence amounts to misconduct so mere service of show cause notice was not sufficient, unless reasons had been given that holding of inquiry was necessary. The respondent, therefore, was condemned unheard.
3. The learned lower Court, however, has not recorded any finding on the point if the grievance notice was served. In the written statement a clear cut objection was raised that no grievance notice had been served. Anyhow, since a copy of the grievance notice Exh. P-2, original postal receipt Exh. P-3 and A.D. Receipt Exh. P-4 are on the record, it is apparent that the grievance notice was actually served. The date of the grievance notice is 15-10-1987 and the postal receipt bears the date as 17-10-1987. The date of receipt of notice given on the A.D. Receipt is 18-10-1987. In these circumstances, the learned lower Court has rightly set aside the order of termination from service.
4. Since the respondent has in his statement deposed that he was jobless from the date of his removal from service, hack benefits too were rightly allowed to him.
5. As a result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.