Find a Lawyer

SARFRAZ versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAN

RR 9, 10A, 10B & 13 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), the appointment of sections 42 and 44 vacated at the Supreme Court post of Assistant Electric Inspector B17, the authority of the Public Service Commission According to the advertisement, the post-appellant who fulfilled the required qualifications applicable to the Public Service Commission in response to the advertisement was issued a letter of call along with the applicant and the date for the interview was fixed, but this time During the letter a letter was written by the Authority to the Deputy Director of Public (Examinations). Related rules of appointment were being modified as the Service Commission postponed the election to a controversial post. The appellant had filed a constitutional petition against the postponement, which was rejected by the High Court, stating that the mere filing of a petition to the Public Service Commission would not entitle any person. The consideration of the post advertised by the Public Service Commission was initiated by the CE Commission through the advertisement of the controversial post and the appellant made a formal request to the Government Service Commission for a request by the authority to the contentious post. Was not withdrawn, the right to stay on the appellant came to be considered for appointment. When the post was advertised, the High Court found that no person would have the right to apply for a post through the Public Service Commission, which was a wrong order. The appeal was approved by the High Court in the constitutional petition and the Supreme Court had appealed and it would be illegal to postpone the test / interview of the candidates, including the appellant. attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Rajana lawyer