Find a Lawyer

PIR NAZIR AHMAD SHAH versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

Section 2A of the Service Tribunals Act 1973 [as amended by the Service Tribunals (Amendment) Act (XVII of 1997]] and the 4 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Constitution of Section 5 Pakistan (1973), Article 212 (3). The respondent corporation removed the applicant. 29 199 1994 Appeal to the Employment Petitioner's Department was dismissed on 6 1997, but it challenged it before the service tribunal before being temporarily banned, with the application The delay was presented by stating the reasons for the justification. The Tribunal, in a cheerful manner, dismissed the delay in requesting the Tribunal and at the same time rejected the appeal on the ground that Section 2A, 10 6 1997 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, was not repealed in the process. Therefore, the applicant was not. Regarding history, when a government employee approved two controversial orders, the Correctional Service Tribunal should have taken a softer approach considering the appeal for delay in appeal. The High Court, in the circumstances, turned the application into appeal and accepted the same, set aside the nominated decision and remanded the case to the service tribunal, whereby the application for a late waiver in light of the Supreme Court's observations. Will be reviewed. In the Mohammad Yaqub case (2000 SCMR 830) and the Civil Appeal No 882 to 890 in 1999, decide on an uncontested decision and simultaneous appeal on the merits so that the case can be dismissed to prevent the case from being remanded. famous high court advocate from Fateh Pur lawyer