Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD FAROOQ KHAN versus MUHAMMAD SHAKEEL KHAN

Review Code of Code of Conduct 1908 Section 114 and O XLVII, R1 Supreme Court One of the applicants who also applied for the post, then filed a certificate along with his application in which it appears. It said that the first position was obtained at the University and Public Service Commission on the basis of the certificate, including the name of the applicant in the list of people it was suggested for appointment that it was stated that the certificate was found confusing. And they are not understandable, the applicant was directed to submit another certificate in support of his claim that in fact it Has secured the first position in the University Petitioner upon filing a fresh copy of the certificate and was given priority by the respondent and relied upon by the applicant according to which the validity certificate was ich, on the date stated in the advertisement Should have been submitted by them, but the certificate presented by the applicant with which its application is found to be ambiguous and lawful, the applicant's request should have been considered invalid and the commission was not authorized. Also to demand about the certificate that after the due date commission Also, it had the full potential of changing the outcome that was finalized by it and without giving the opportunity to those who were to be adversely affected, the marks given to the applicant on the basis of hearing. After the certificate was not legally granted to the applicants, the finding of the applicant's certificate being confused by the commission itself stated that the HC lawer from fb area from Bewal lawyer