Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ATAULLAH versus ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN

Articles 3A (b) and 4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 212 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973, prosecuted, charged and fined for violating the principles of natural justice due to railway accident. ? Two members of the service tribunal stayed the appeal hearing for three years, which allowed the appeal, but one member of the different opinion service of the tribunal observed that after the minor's fine for stopping development for one year became unpleasant, The authority will refrain from this. Keeping the penalty in view of the issue of promotion / publicity etc. in the case of public servants, while the other member accepted the government employee's request on the basis that the inquiry officer apologized to the public servant, then he was authorized. The sentence imposed by was not justified. The two-member opinion bench, which had the case referred to under Section 3A (b) of the Service Tribunals Act 1973, dismissed the appeal filed by government employees altogether, against government employees. Against an order of authority effect processing against a criminal nature, the chairman of the service tribunal should have given the public servants the benefit of the doubt because such benefit was legally obtained. Instead of resolving disputes between the two members of the Tribunal of Government Employees, the Chairman of the Tribunal, who confirmed the penalties imposed by the authority on public servants, was under serious threat of being found guilty of public servants. Done. Under the charges on which he was found guilty, the order passed by the chairman criminal advocate from Kot Addu lawyer