1. Abdul Jabbar, petitioner has moved the present petition under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, against Messrs Allied Bank of Pakistan through its Assistant Vice- President for the recovery of the arrears of his pay with effect from 11th November 1976, up to the date of the filing of the petition, i.e. 8th October 1977. The facts alleged in the petition are that the petitioner remained on casual leave from 11th November 1976 to 17th Novem--ber 1976, which leave was sanctioned by the respondent. The petitioner remains sick leave from 18th November 1976 to 25th March 1977, for which period he has submitted medical certificates along with the application for medical leave from time to time that the petitioner was not allowed to resume his duty from 26th March 1977, till the institution of the petition. Hence the petitioner has prayed that he be allowed the arrears of pay with effect from 11th November 1976, till the date of the institution of the petition.
2. Written statement was filed wherein various legal and factual please have been raised to the effect that the petition has not been filed in accordance with the provision of 25-A of the I. R. O., that the petition is not maintainable under the I. R. O. That no guaranteed and secured rights have been violeted, that this Court has no jurisdiction.
3. On factual side it has been admitted that on 17th November 1976, the petitioner had submitted an application for one month leave on medical ground but this leave was not granted to him and he was informed vide letter dated 17th November 1976, whereas he was also informed that he should get himself examined by the medical board and submit certificate from the board or otherwise he should resume duty immediately but the petitioner fails to do so. It has been alleged in the reply that the petitioner was transferred from Mardan Cantt. Branch vide Office Order No. ZO/76/Estt/603, dated 9th November 1976, as he was posted at Mingora branch and in order to avoid resumption of duty at new place of his posting the petitioner feigned illness. The petitioner was released from Mardan Cantt. Branch on 8 January 1977 and was advised to correspond with his new branch, i.e. Mingora, whatever he did not report at Mingora and thus absented himself from duty. On alleged recovery from illness he should have reported at his branch at Mingora. He has been repeatedly advised to resume duty failing which disciplinary action would be taken against him but no avail.
4. Evidence of the parties recorded, Arguments heard and record perused.
5. As regard the jurisdiction of the Labour Court the matter has been settled at rest in PLD 1976 Lah.
6. 528, wherein their Lordships have held that section 22 of the Wages Act, does not exclude the jurisdiction of the Labour Court under the provision of the Industrial Relations Ordinance to deal with the matters relating to the wages of the employees.
7. Exh. PX/1 is the grievance notice served by the petitioner on the respon--dent and Exh. PX/2 is its postal receipt. The R. W. 1, Mr. Tahir has admitted that the postal receipt Exh. PX/2, bears his signature vide which he had received certain documents addressed to the respondent by the petitioner. Now the petitioner's claim is that the alleged document was the grievance notice as con--templated under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance and if it was any thing else than the grievance notice onus has shifted to the respondent and have proved that it was not a grievance notice which he received vide Exh. P. W./2 and should have placed that document on file which he had received vide Exh. P. X/2. By not doing so the respondent thus fails to discharge onus and hence I hold that Exh. P. X/l, is the grievance notice served on the respondent through postal receipt Exh. P. X/2.
8. According to the Wage Commission Award, 1974-75, the employees are entitled to medical leave which may be sanctioned by their employers during illness if a certificate from the Medical Officer of the bank, etc. Or when there is no such Medical Officer, from any registered medical practitioner is produced or submitted. Of course the discretion has been given to the employer to reject such application or it may accept such application. However in case of rejection the principle of natural justice would demand that reason should be given while rejecting the said medical certificate. In the instant case the medical certificates Exhs. P. 1/1, P. 1/2, P. 1/3, P. 1/4, P. 1/5, P. 1/6 and P.1/7, have been issued by recognised medical practitioners and admittedly there was no Medical Officer of the bank at Mardan during the period in dispute. The certificates have not been contested by the respondent therefore these are admitted to be correct and taken into evidence as such as no objection has been raised by the respondent but no reason has been shown as to why these certificates were rejected. Vide letter, dated 6th January 1977, copy Exh. R. W. 1/5, the petitioner has been informed that he should get himself checked by Dr. Musharraf Khan, Medical Officer of the bank but this was not done by the petitioner. The petitioner was under transfer and vide Exh. R. W.
9. 1/5, he was released from his duty on 8th January 1977, with the direction to report at new place of his posting which means that till 8th January 1977, the petitioner was incumbent of the Mardan Cantt. Branch and all the medical certificates submitted for this period have to be considered by the Mardan Cantt. Branch and the medical certificate issued to the petitioner after 8th January 1977, had to be sent by the petitioner to Mingora Branch because that was his new Place of duty. In circumstances the claim of the petitioner for the period 11th November 1976 to 8th January 1977, is liability of the Mardan Cantt. Branch and all the certificates submitted by the petitioner to Mardan Cantt. Branch for the period the petitioner would be entitled to the pay of his Post at Mardan.
10. Hence I allow the petition to the extent that the petitioner is entitled to the emoluments of his post from 11th November 1976 to 8th January 1977, only. The rest of his claim is rejected. th