DECISION ' This is the tenth round of litigation in which the dismissal of a Head Cashier Abdul Jabbar Qureshi on account of misappropriation or defalcation has been called in question. Recently Labour Court No, VI Hyderabad has directed reinstatement in service of Abdul Jabbar Qureshi in the National Bank with 50% back benefits. Against this order the National Bank of Pakistan has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
2. The facts are very simple. Abdul Jabbar Qureshi was posted as head cashier in Var Branch of National Bank. In the year 1979 Abdul Jabbar Qureshi was charge-sheeted for having misappropriated:-
(1) Rs,700 deposited by customer Muhammad Usman on 28-10-1979;
(2) Rs,500 deposited by customer Alauddin Khawaja on 31-10-1979;
(3) Rs,200 deposited by customer Amir Bukhsh on 1:11-1979; and
(4) Rs,1,500 deposited by customer Muhammad Daud on 29-9-1979.
' He put these amounts in his pocket instead of entering the amount in the Cash Register and Ledger. When one of the customers Alauddin Khawaja came to the Bank with a cheque to withdraw Rs,1,500 from his account he was told that there were only Rs,1,000 balance and he could not draw a cheque for Rs,1,500. When the matter was investigated on the complaint of the client an amount of Rs,500 were found lying in the drawer of Mr. Abdul Jabbar Qureshi. The matter was referred by the Manager to the Zonal Office Hyderabad and the Assistant Vice-President appointed one Mr. Abdullah Chohan as Enquiry Officer to hold domestic enquiry against the senior head cashier. The head cashier confessed temporary misappropriation and reimbursed the missing amount to the Bank to make good the loss. Mr. Abdul Jabbar explained that he had failed to post these vouchers in the ledger due to forgetfulness. The amounts were deposited on 10-11-1979 as claimed by the account holders but these amounts were not deposited in the Bank nor were they posted in the ledger due to "forgetfullness". The Enquiry Officer found that it was a case calling for infliction of drastic punishment. That Mr. Abdul Jabbar Qureshi had admitted all the three charges regarding misappropriation of Rs,700 on 26-10-1979. Rs,500 on 31-10-1979 and Rs,200 on 31-10-1979. That he also helped Mr. Farooq Ahmed cashier to misappropriate Rs,1,500 on 29-9-1979. The Enquiry Officer, therefore, suggested that Abdul Jabbar Qureshi Senior Head Cashier and Farooq Ahmed Cashier be dismissed from Bank service. This suggestion was approved by the Vice-President Administration and also the President of the Bank. By letter dated 24th July 1980 Abdul Jabbar Qureshi senior head cashier National Bank of Pakistan Var Branch was dismissed from Bank service with immediate effect.
3. Against this order respondent sent a grievance notice and then filed a grievance petition before the Labour Court at Hyderabad. The Labour Court Hyderabad dismissed the petition. The respondent then moved the Appellate Tribunal and thereafter the High Court Bench at Hyderabad.
The case was remanded for deciding the issue whether the head cashier was worker and whether his grievance petition was maintainable under the I.R.O. The Labour Court held that the head cashier was a worker but no further orders were passed regarding the merits of the case. The case again came before the Appellate Tribunal and was remanded to the Labour Court for passing orders on merits. The learned Labour Court considered this temporary misappropriation by Abdul Jabbar Qureshi to be on account for "lethargy" and his petition was, therefore, allowed for reinstatement with 50% back benefits.
4. Since misappropriation of the amounts deposited by the customer for several days was admitted and the amounts were paid back, the temporary misappropriation was clearly established and the enquiry was a mere formality. It was very serious charge that one of the customers presented a cheque of Rs,1,500 for withdrawal and he was told that he had only Rs,1,000 as balance in his Ledger Account. Later on it was found that he had also deposited Rs,500 but these were not posted, in his ledger and had been misappropriated.
5. The customers repose confidence in the Banks and entrust their money, little knowing that even in the Bank there were Bank employees who would commit misappropriation. If the people lose confidence in the Banking system of this country it will be a disaster. Such persons should be removed from the Banks without the least possible delay and the question of their reinstatement by way of leniency does not arise.
6. It may be remarked en passant that according to the evidence the Var Branch of National Bank could not be regarded as a commercial establishment as held by the Karachi High Court in the case of Ehsan Sons Limited v. Abdul Razzalc Habib 1987 PLC 390. It was observed in that case; "Mere fact that a company individual or association of individuals runs or sets up separate establishment at different places, would not authorize treating all such establishments, to be one establishment either for purposes of Industrial Relations Ordinance or Standing Orders Ordinance even if there was a provision for transfer of staff from one establishment to another."
7. In this case the National Bank had several branches all over Pakistan but each such branch is to be considered as a separate unit and if it consists of less than 20 workers the Industrial Relations Ordinance or Standing Orders would have no application. In the present case admittedly in the Var Branch there were one Manager, one head cashier, one cashier, two guards and one peon. The number of workers employed are certainly less than 20 and so this would not be an industrial or commercial establishment and would be governed by the Banks own Statutory Rules.
8. For the above reasons the order of reinstatement and back benefits passed by the labor Court, Hyderabad is set aside and the amount of back benefits namely Rs,1,22,491.96 may be refunded to the Bank after thirty days.