Find a Lawyer

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN versus MUHAMMAD YASIN, SUB-INSPECTOR

The respondents' choice to perform duties as United Nations Monitor in Article 9 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 27 and 199 foreign countries of the Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974 were omitted and they The person who was much younger. Even before the selection board was elected, the respondent was once deployed to the UN mission and acted as the government refused to send constitutional respondents abroad. The High Court, in its constitutional jurisdiction, instructed the Government to include the respondent \ 's name in a mission that could be forwarded to any High Court of the foreign country in the future, however, in the intra-court appeal to the Federal Government. It was directed to send the respondents abroad, as well as their service rights under the Punjab Servants Act. Heth was regularly enforced. 1974 and thereafter periodic rules were enacted, there was no violation of Punjab Civil Servant or any of the rules, refusing to send the defendants overseas, directly earning foreign exchange of the government. I will suffer because public servants cannot have the right to retain constitutional petitions to provide a valid hard cover for relief, as the High Court has presented in the Intra Court. The loss recognized in earning foreign exchange was hardly a clear violation of any legal provision. The constitutional jurisdiction is arbitrary in nature, even if the public servant found a good case, it could have been ruled out if there was more harm than treatment. jobs for fresh advocates from Takhtbai lawyer