SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1998 MarsdenLR 150

HIGH COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
KAMARUDDIN BIN ABU BAKAR – Appellant
Versus
SISTEM PENERBANGAN MALAYSIA BHD & ANOR – Respondent
[Originating Motion No R-3-25-93 Of 1997]



JUDGMENT

Y.A. DATO' NIK HASHIM BIN NIK AB. RAHMAN, J.

The Applicant who was the Respondent's security officer since 1986 and drawing a basic salary of RM1,122.00 and a fixed allowance of RM105.00 per month, was dismissed from service for an act of misconduct in that he was found at the Security Post B, Subang International Airport Kuala Lumpur to have removed dry store items consisting of chocolate biscuits, butter, nescafe sachets and mango juice without authority on 12 December 1990. The dismissal was referred to the Industrial Court which found that the Applicant's dismissal was with just cause and excuse. The Applicant applied for an order of certiorari to quash the said award. After hearing submissions from both sides, I, on 16 June 1998, dismissed the application with costs. Here are my reasons for so dismissing the application.

The facts as reported by Lee Fook Wing (COW-3), another security officer of the Respondent, are as follows: [2]

"On the 12 December 1990 at about 2315 hours whilst positioned at Post B together with Project Warden Sew HK, Arjan Singh, Dzul Mohd and Security Warden Tuan Haji Harison, I saw Security Officer Kamaruddin Bakar (applicant) approached Post B with a transparent plastic bag full of dry stores. He then requested a string from S/W Harison for tying the plastic bag. At this juncture, I approached him and asked him for an authorisation letter but he said that it was not necessary as those items are meant for the kampong people who had been victims of a flood. Before I could query him further, he lifted the plastic bag onto his motorcycle carrier and rode out of the premises. As the plastic bag was transparent, I could see the contents in the plastic bag which consisted of biscuits, nescafe, butter and mango juice. The amount inside the plastic bag is enough to cater for at least 20-30 people. After he had left, I contacted General Store and spoke to storekeeper Khalid who admitted giving [3] those items to Kamaruddin Bakar (applicant) even though there was no authorisation letter from the latter. I then called security man and he instructed me to call Cabin Supplies Manager Encik Yasin and get his clearance to record the statement from storekeeper Khalid. This is my report."

A letter of allegation was issued to the Applicant on 26 January 1991 by the Respondent pertaining to the alleged misconduct. The Applicant replied, contending that after enquiring from the officers on duty at post B, he took five to six open and half-utilised packets of biscuits and some open and utilised tea bags for flood victims at Kampong Lembah Subang. He denied taking the chocolate biscuits, butter, nescafe and mango juice.

On 29 April 1991, the Respondent issued the Applicant a notice of inquiry to answer the charge of removing the Respondent's items without due authority. The domestic inquiry scheduled for 22 May 1991 was postponed and a second notice of inquiry was issued to the Applicant on 27 May 1991. The [4] Applicant attended the domestic inquiry on 13 June 1991. He, however, requested for a postponement, as he wanted a representative to represent him. A third notice of inquiry was served on the Applicant on 17 June 1991 informing him of the new date of the inquiry. The Applicant did not attend the domestic inquiry scheduled for 18 June 1991 although he confirmed during the course of his testimony that he was informed of the same. The domestic inquiry was therefore postponed to 19 June 1991 to enable the Applicant to be present at the inquiry. The Applicant failed to attend the inquiry on 19 June 1991 and the inquiry proceeded without him after it was stood down until 10.30 am in a further attempt by the Respondent to accommodate the Applicant.

The Applicant was found guilty of the charge levelled against him. After studying the report of the inquiry and taken into consideration the gravity of the offence committed and all the surrounding circumstances including the Applicant's past record, the Respondent by lette

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top