Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN KAYANI versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal (Code of Conduct) 1976 Rr 8 & 28 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunal Act (XXII of 1975), Section 4 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Authorization Act (VII of 1974), Section 47 Judicial Officers Seniority Interc An appeal was filed by the E-High Court against the High Court order which was before the service tribunal in which the High Court judges were not implemented as the respondents because the basic requirement was that the appeal The applicant should apply to the High Court Judges as they should appeal to the respondents in the appeal filed before the Registrar of the Service Tribunal. The High Court, which was enforced instead of the High Court Judges, cannot be a substitute for the High Court itself, which is an essential rule of the Service Tribunals Rule 8, 1976, dismissing an appeal for infringement. Will be forced to do so. Service matters were that if an order adversely affected the interest of a particular party, it was approved by the authority, the competent authority, as respondents in the appeal under the Service Tribunal Service Tribunals Act and the rules set out there. The application must be made under which special rules exist and special provisions are provided under the rules and regulations. 8, shall not be entitled to any relief and appeal found to be in violation of the rules. Without the enforcement of the competent authority by this party, the filing officer will be ineligible, in the absence of a competent authority as a party to such proceedings, neither effective order can be passed, nor a decree passed. May be imposed by the Court Judges, who are parties advocate from Dadu lawyer