DECISION ' This appeal is directed against a single order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No, VI at Hyderabad, dated 8-1-1991 whereby the grievance applications of the respondents were allowed.
2. I have heard Mr. Raes M. Mushtaq, learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. S. Fasahat Hussain Rizvi, learned Advocate for the respondents and have also gone through the record and proceedings of the case.
3. Admitted facts of the case are, that the respondents were employed with the appellants and they were promoted to the higher grade from 1-2-1989 on probation of 3 months. The probation period was then extended for 3 months more on 29-4-1989. However, their work was not found satisfactory, therefore, they were reverted back to their original post by order, dated 29-7-1989.
Under Standing Order 1, the probation period of workman is only 3 months and there is no provision for extension of the probationary period. No rules of the Employers' establishment have been produced to show any provision for extension of the period of probation. It is a settled law that during the period of probation, if the work of the probationer was not found satisfactory, he could be reverted or removed without showing any reason or without holding any enquiry. In the instant case, however, the respondents have been reverted after six months viz., after the period of probation of 3 months under Standing Order 1 had long back expired. The order of reversion on the ground of their work was not found satisfactory is sort of stigma and in fact is misconduct. As such, respondents could have been reverted without holding enquiry as provided under Standing 15(4) and without giving them an opportunity to show cause against them.
4. I accordingly find no merit in this appeal which is dismissed.