This is an appeal preferred against an order dated 5-11-74 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Junior Labour Court, Rawalpindi on a petition of the appellant. Petition was dismissed by the impugned order, hence this appeal by Mahbub Shah.
2. I have heard the learned counsels of the parties at length and have gone through the record of the Junior Labour Court as well as impu--gned order.
3. Brief facts arising to this appeal are that appellant was a Compositor in the Pakistan Times Press, Rawalpindi; allegedly he was a Compositor in the Advertisement section of the respondent concern and according to the relevant rules senior compositors as well as com--positors are said to be given grade V and accordingly he was given that grade which he enjoyed for to months. But ultimately it was with--drawn from him and he was made to pay back the money which he already had enjoyed for to months. He was verbally transferred to another section. Appellant has urged that after this at of the Resident Editor of the respondent concern, he served him with a grievance notice and for that reason Resident Editor started victimising him and harassing him.
First thing he did was that he asked the Incharge not to mark his attendance in the Advertisement section.
4. Learned Junior Labour Court has held that appellant petitioner has failed' to prove his transfer from one section to the other section, and further that there is no advertisement section. Exh. P13 is a photostat copy of an identity card of the appellant wherein he has been shown Compositor in the department of advertisement. Exhs. PC/1 to 6 are the copies of printed forms for leave. In very application he has been mentioned as Compositor Advertisement section. In the light of these documents I wonder how the Presiding Officer, Junior Labour Court has come to the conclusion that there was no advertisement section. These documents clearly show that there is an advertisement section and appellant was really a Compositor of that section. So far as other obser--vation of the learned Presiding Officer is concerned and which is to the effect that it was the duty of the appellant to prove that he was transferred from that section. On the other hand, it was incombent upon the respon--dent either to prove that he was never transferred from that section or to prove that a Compositor of the advertisement section who enjoyed grade V instead of grade VI could be transferred to other sections also. If the rules permit that the Compositors of advertisement section, would enjoy grade V then he should not have been given grade and no recovery of the difference of scales V & VI should have been made from him.
5. I am therefore, constrained to upset the order of the Junior Labour Court and accept the appeal.