Find a Lawyer

IMDAC ALI versus SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF PADSTAN, ISLAMABAD

Sections 8 and 12 of the Civil Servants Act 1973, a seniority entitlement appellant claimed that although he was a defendant, he was accompanied by a junior in the seniority list, which allowed some appellants to be appointed or promoted against vacant vacancies. While others were temporarily promoted on ad hoc basis. Many applicants could not be eligible for competitive exams to promote the quota increase, yet the respondents were promoted / promoted despite providing this effect in their appointment letters. The appointment / promotion was regular, and with no impairment in their appointment to another defective appellants - the issue was that when the final list was finalized and identified, they sought the Department's treatment of seniority. No one bothered to challenge the list, so the final victory was won against them by the government employees who made their He had no problem filing a court appeal when he was 17 years old. The filing of an appeal before the service tribunal appellants could not be filed to be final as the sanitary list could not present such appeals because they were unable to file the same 12A, Civil Servants Act 1973, regular cases. Not applicable to the defendant's sanity, however, cannot be bothered even if it is disorderly. Appellant's appointments were later regularized, so, appellants were not entitled to relief and their appeals against defendant's superannuation were circumvented. ask a advocate free from Village Sunder lawyer