1. DECISION This is an appeal against an order dated 18-1-75 of Junior Labour Court No. II Karachi allowing application under section 25 of I. R. O., 1969 and re-instating respondent-worker in servic; with full back-benefits. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that respondent was employed at the godown of Messrs Republic Motors. The respondent's duty was to make delivery of goods to the personnel of Messrs Republic Motors and to send delivery and stock reports to the Head Office of the appellants and to the respective banks. A show-cause notice was sent to him for remaining absent for three days viz. 16-9-1974 to 18-9-1974. He did not reply. On 25-9-1974 he signed Muster Roll at 9-30 a m. and then deserted his duties. On 1-10-74 he came at Head Office and tendered his resignation Exh. 1-D page 21 with immediate effect and also requested for service certificate as he needed it for better prospects elsewhere. Such certificate was issued to him on that day. On 3-10- 1974 he received his all dues of Rs. 750 and September 1974 salary of Rs. 350. The appellant denies that his resignation was obtained under duress or force or coercion. The respondent approached Junior Labour Court and he succeeded. The appellant, being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 18-1-1975, has come up in appeal before this Court. , Admitted facts are that the respondent- workman was served with a show- cause notice for remaining absent. He did not reply. On 1-10- 1974 he tendered resignation. According to the workman resignation was. obtained under duress and force. Now point for consideration arises whether he tendered resignation voluntarily? The respondent-workman admits that resignation Exh. 1-D bears his signature. The burden of proof shifts on the respondent to prove that resignation was obtained under duress or force. But he has failed to discharge the burden. He has led no evidence. If the Manager had obtained resignation from him under force, he should have immediately complained to the authorities. It is admitted by him that he did not complain to any authorities. He lay slumber for nearly 2| months and did not whisper to any one but one fine morning on or about 23rd December 1974 he moved machinery of Junior Labour Court by filing an application under section 25-A of I. R. O., 1969. Moreover taking service certificate and accepting his dues from the appellant falsifies the stand of the respondent.
2. These circumstances and evidence of Salim Manager coupled with Exh. 1-D go to prove that he had voluntarily resigned. The conduct of the respondent does not look above board. By tendering resignation, the contingency of holding an inquiry never arose and the authority concerned was left with no alternative to terminate his services. The resignation was unconditional and made it impossible for the Management to do any thing else but to terminate his services. It is also admitted by the respondent in the last line of his cross-examination that he had not asked for returning of the resignation application. Even if he had withdrawn his resignation before it wHs accepted, he could not claim an absolute right to withdraw his application. His resignation was accepted with immediate effect as requested by him. The impugned order is perverse. Accordingly I set it aside and accept appeal. No. costs.