ABDUL LATIF versus DEPUTY INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE
Sindh Police (Qualifications and Discipline) Rules 1988 R 12 Employee removal charge was a charge sheet and it was alleged that a person was lodged and a criminal criminal case was filed against the inquiry officer of the public servant. Who didn't. A public servant should be held guilty of the accusations leveled against him, such recommendations are recommended for his execution and authorized authority, but the successor to the post of the competent authority who has deported the civil servant has to apologize. Withdrew the order and issued an order to remove the public servant from the job, the successor of the official against the employee was based on personal information rather than evidence on record, the order against removal of the employee by the successor in the office was not just any proof. Or the cause was approved without a record, but rather a personal hearing plan B was passed without providing the opportunity. The order to remove a civil servant from employment was based on Lai's irregular hearing as opposed to the appointment of an inquiry officer, but it was also against the fair principles of fair justice and fair play because the non-official employee's Serious orders were condemned, in the circumstances, they were set aside
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
