' The appeal captioned above challenges the decision dated 21-7-1988 recorded by learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.4, Faisalabad whereby the respondent has been treated as a permanent employee and has been directed to be reinstated in service with back benefits.
2. The case of the appellant is that the respondent was temporarily employed on 18-3-1987 and within the probationary period of three months his services were terminated. Learned counsel for the respondent has not been able to show that the respondent was a permanent employee on the date on which his services were terminated. On the record there is no material to show that he had become a permanent employee. The learned lower Court thus wrongly held without evidence that the respondent had become permanent. However, the order of termination has been rightly set aside since it was oral whereas the provision of Standing Order 12(3) is that by written order giving explicit reasons services of a workman can be terminated.
3. As a result the appeal is partly accepted and the impugned decision is modified setting aside the declaration that the respondent is a permanent employee. The order of reinstatement with back benefits shall stand. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.