' This is an appeal directed against the decision dated 25-11-1986 recorded by learned Labour Court No, 5, Faisalabad, whereby the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted.
2. The respondent was initially recruited as cleaner in 1978 and was made conductor in 1985. When he reported on duty after returning from leave on 21-4-1986 he was ordered to work as Oil Greaser.
Since the respondent was earning commission as conductor, he therefore, feeling aggrieved challenged the order in his grievance petition. The order posting him as Oil Greaser was passed on 6-1-1986 but he was actually made to work as such on 21-4-1986. The learned Labour Court has rightly held that period of limitation for the service of grievance notice had started from 21-4-1986.
Since up to 21-4-1986 the respondent had been working as conductor he had no cause to challenge the order dated 6-1-986. Even this much is not clear if the said order had been served upon the respondent.
3. Loss of commission cannot be a ground to challenge the order but since the category of the respondent was changed he had rightly felt aggrieved. Category of employee cannot be changed without his consent. Learned counsel for the appellant has failed to show that post of Oil Greaser belongs to the Traffic Cadre. I have gone through the file but have failed to find any document which could have shown that the said post like the post of conductor belongs to Traffic Cadre. In these circumstances the learned lower Court was justified in accepting the grievance petition.
4. As a result the appeal is dismissed.