Find a Lawyer

SAEED AHMAD versus WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

R2 (5) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 212 (3) Employing Employment Charges Against Employee During his tenure, theft of electricity by consumers was found guilty of forwarding false statements of Executive Engineer Employee Line Access. And was also fined. The censorship service tribunal retained the slight sensation of punishment given to the employee. The confession made about the employee, which he was found guilty of, was not mentioned in the charge sheet; he is not well established. There was such a charge sheet that the employee needed to see. Any statement / withdrawal that came out of his office reflects the facts. The applicant should have looked at the statements of the units received from the grid station and compared them with the incorrect data of the line losses sent in the statement. The Office Services Tribunal had carefully considered this aspect of the matter and rightly concluded that the matter should have been re-verified before the matter was taken forward and finally the employee's appellate department The censor sentence awarded by the authority was presented in the facts and in the case, in which case the service tribunal had the right to demand that no censorship penalty be awarded to the employees. Interjection appeal leave was denied in the circumstances famous supreme court advocate from Digri lawyer