Find a Lawyer

FARUKH DIN versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH

Volume III, R 22 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Application Issues notification for such amendment of results without the opportunity to be reviewed by the candidates in consequence of correction of error detection in subsequent stage, In view of his authority under Rule III, R 22 of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Larkana issued such notification to the candidates in connection with the submission of their issued number / pass certificate and obtaining a new certificate, Where such notification was issued after the whole purpose. Inquiries, nothing was wrong In this notification the Board of Education had the authority to rectify a subsequent error where, during the course of the inquiry, the authorities did not know who the candidate was, W. (whom) Were involved in committal) forgery in the board records, question of meeting the candidates' chances of being heard, therefore the inquiry process was started, will not arise at all, after the issuance of such notification, Showcase notices were issued to clarify the status of, but such inquiry reports from him The writ inquiries were seriously contested and relied solely on technical skills. After looking at the original register, it was believed that the forgery was committed and it was committed, so the Inquiry Committee rightly noted that rubbing, cutting and overwriting were common features in the blends, from the documents. The tampering was intertwined. There was no legal right for the board staff to recover any fraudulent fraud and misrepresentation. jobs for fresh advocates from Mohmand lawyer