Pakistan Case Law← Search
1996 PLC 220

JAMEEL AHMED vs GENERAL MANAGER/PERSONNEL, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS,

Citation1996 PLC 220
CourtLabour Appellate Tribunal
Case No.Appeal No, KAR-273 of 1995
Date1995-09-03
Judge(s)Mushtaq Ali Kazi
ResultAppeal dismissed

DECISION ' This appeal is directed against the order of 5th Sindh Labour Court, Karachi, dismissing petition under section 25-A of the I.R.O. For re-instatement in service of the appellant with hack benefits.

2. The appellant was appointed as an electric helper in the Railways on 25-1-1976. He applied for grant of 1.0 days' leave with effect from 10-6-1986. The applicant did not obtain any leave order but continuously remained absent until 2-1-1988 when he reported for duty. His excuse for absenting himself for more than 33 months was that he was lying ill. He has produced a Certificate from a private Medical Practitioner of Baghdadi Area, Karachi dated 6-1-1987 that the appellant was under his treatment for infective hepatitis and he has been advised rest from 25-12-1986 to 31-3-1987. This certificate does not show the date from which the patient was suffering nor does it bear the signature of the patient. The patient resided in the Area Bagh area situated at the distance 7 or 8 miles from Baghdadi. The Medical Certificate by itself has no evidence unless the doctor is examined. In this case the doctor was not even summoned by the appellant in the Labour Court.

This Medical Certificate is hardly of any value. There is no evidence of medical test in a case of infective hepatitis nor does it show the type of infective hepatitis whether it was A, B, C, D or E.

Absence from duty without leave is a continuing wrong giving rise to a continuing cause of action.

The question of limitation would not, therefore, arise, when the appellant reported for duty he was charge-sheeted and an enquiry was held against him. He was found guilty and after a second show-cause notice he was dismissed from service.

3. Under the circumstances the appeal appears to be without substance and I can see no reason for interference. Appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search