Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD LQBAL versus CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR OF AUQAF/SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, AUQAF DEPARTMENT, LAHORE

In the Intra-Court Appeal against the approval of the resignation of the resignation of the employee of the AAQ and the resignation of the resignation of the authority employee of the AAQ Department, Punjab Government (Rules, Services), Rule 12, Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3). Rejected, however, an order of consent was approved, in which the department stated that the employees were ready to accept the employees without any financial responsibility or to claim the seniority authority under the orders of such consent. A fresh appointment order has been issued. However, after that, such order was set aside and a fresh order was issued by the authority. In the constitutional petition and the intra-court appeal the order was later canceled, but to some extent not correct before the intra-court appeal was dealt with consent, under which the department had to accept the pause without any financial responsibility. Employee Seniority's only reservation as a fresh recruitment of a claim or claim was that the employee could apply to the department for continuation of his previous services for the purpose of pension authority to issue a re-employment order in accordance with the consent order. But instead had to say the words of employment again. Was used so that the error was corrected by the authority following the order. The High Court had effectively dealt with the issue of employees, the employee could not claim more than it was stated that the order of consent of the High Court in the intra-court appeal decision was not a weakness. The leave to appeal was denied in the circumstances registration advocate from Sehwan lawyer