Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD TUFAIL versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

Applicants were employed as Family Planning Officers for the Termination of Service Tribunals Act 1973 (1973), Arts 199 and 212 Constitutional Requests, their services were terminated by the competent authority. Regarding the order and conditions of the applicants to maintain the signature of the applicant against such order, in view of the bar contained in Article 1212 of the Constitution of Pakistan 0973, only the service tribunal under section 4, service tribunals act 1973 Can be challenged) Applicants say that as Federal Public Service Commission was imposed The parties to these petitions and the Federal Public Service Commission's action could not have been challenged before the service tribunal, their constitutional petitions were authorized, as the jurisdiction of the court could not be granted by nature and the parties involved. The role of cannot be delegated. Before that, but I was, in fact, the order by which the jurisdiction of the forum was deciding the factor. Once it is clear that the order is a termination order and is related to a public servant, and to check the legality and ownership, it is related to the terms and conditions of service. It was not necessary at all to carry out the Federal Public Service Commission's ruling. By enforcing the Federal Public Service Commission as a party, the applicant could not grant the jurisdiction of the High Court in relation to an order which would otherwise have been beyond the jurisdiction of the High Court pursuant to the mandate of Article 212. Constitution of Pakistan (1973) The High Court upholds the decision in accordance with law criminal advocate from Charsada lawyer