DECISION This is an appeal against an award of the learned Presiding Officer of Sind Labour Cou,t No. II, Karachi dated March 12, 1973, whereby the learned Labour Court ordered the re-instatement of the respondent with full back benefits.
2. The respondent was employed as Assistant Cook by Messrs Sind Islamia Hotel, Karachi. He had gone on four months leave on 23rd March 1971. When he returned from leave and reported for duty on 2nd July, 1971, the appellant hotel refused to take him back. It may be mentioned here that in the affidavit filed by the respondent, 23-7-71, had been scored out and in its place 13-7-71, is mention as the date when respondent reported for duty. On the face of it, this could not be so, as admittedly the leave of the respondent expired on 22-7-1971. The case of the appellant Hotel was that the respondent had left his service Ono gone a4sy. The learned Labour Court came to the conclusion that the respondent was in the permanent service of the appellant and that he had gone on leave.
T he appel--lant had refused to take him back after the respondent came back from leave.
3. I have heard the learned Representatives of the parries. There is a contradiction in the statement of Ghuiam Jilani, respondent, and also In the statement of Abdul Qadir, a Partner in the Hotel. The learned Labour Court, however, has given good reasons, which is not necessary to repeat for accepting the Statement of Ghulan Jilani. I would hold that the respond--ent is entitled to re- instatement.
4. The other point that requires consideration is if the respondent is entitled to full back benefits.
The learned 'Labour Court had granted fall back benefits to the respondent, I am of the view, accepting the statement of Ghulam Jilani in his cross-examination, that he is not entitled to any back benefits. The respondent in his cross-examination stated an under: "3 or 4 days after the respondents refused to take me back on duty I had obtained a job in Wall Mohammad Hotel, but I am on no longer in their employment."
5. This he stated on 26th June 1972. It, therefore, follows that July 1971 to June 1972, ha was employed with Wali Mohammad Hotel. He has not stated that after leaving the employment of Wali Mohammed Hotel, he is lying Idle. In the absence of any statement of Ghulam Jilani that he Pas un- -employed after he left the service of Wali Mohammad Hotel. I would hold that he is not entitled to any back benefits. At this stage, it may also be noted that in the application the respondent stated that he was drawing a salary of Rs. 270.00 per month, but in the cross examination he stated that "I was working on daily wages". I will accept his statement ft cross examination that he was working on daily wages, but not on monthly salary, as stated by him in his application. The respondent, however, have not stated as to what were his daily wages. I have made this observation only to avoid any claim by the respondent for monthly salary at the rate of R x. 270.00.
6. For the reasons given above, I would modify the award of the learned Labour Court and order the re-instatement of the respondent forthwith but he would not be entitled to any back benefits.