DECISION ' This is an appeal against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No,I, Karachi, dated 24-9-1989.
2. I have heard Mr. Muhammad Shafiq Qureshi, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Shareef Ahmed Malik, learned counsel for the respondents and have also come through the record and proceedings of the case.
3. The facts of the case are that the appellant remained absent without intimatior for more than ten days from 11-7-1987. He was charge sheeted on 25-7-1987 and after domestic enquiry he was found guilty and was dismissed from service on 26-8-1987. Being aggrieved by this dismissal order he served grievance notice upon the respondent and then filed grievance petition before the Labour Court.
4. The main contention of the appellant is that the enquiry was not fair as he was not given any opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses. The enquiry proceedings show that no question in cross-examination was put to the prosecution witnesses. In the Enquiry Report the Enquiry Officer has stated that the appellant did not want to cross-examine the witnesses of the prosecution. There is no such note in the enquiry proceedings. The appellant in his grievance notice, grievance petition and affidavit-in-evidence has alleged that he was not given opportunity to cross-examine the respondent's witnesses. The Enquiry Officer Mr. Shafiq Ahmad has not been examined before the learned Labour Court therefore, the appellant did not have any opportunity to cross-examine him nor have the respondents proved that the appellant did not want to cross- examine the respondents witnesses. Mr. Shareef Ahmed Malik has contended that no application in this respect was made by the appellant before issuance of show-cause notice by them. Be it as it may, I am of opinion that the Court cannot come to the correct and proper finding as to whether the enquiry was fair and proper without examining the Enquiry Officer who is still in the service of the respondents.
5. Under the circumstances without going into merits of the case, I set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the learned Labour Court with the direction to complete the proceedings within three months and decide the case afresh, after examining the Enquiry Officer and after again hearing the parties, unprejudiced by its previous order. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Labour Court No,I on 9-4-1990.