Find a Lawyer

SABOOR AHMAD versus MANAGING DIRECTOR, SUI SOUTHERN COMPANY LIMITED, UNIVERSITY ROAD, KARACHI

Section 2A & 4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 212 (3) of the Services Tribunals Act 1973 (Applicant), because of the absence of duty due to the applicant being involved in a criminal case as an employee of Sui Northern Gas Company. Was retired His service after being acquitted of a criminal trial, but his absence was considered a special leave without pay, and the appeal was preferred by the applicant before the service tribunal was dismissed. It was that the duration of her absence could not be cured. The pay as a special leave, as he was involved in a false case, in which he was acquitted and unable to perform public duties during his detention, shows the legitimacy of the restoration order. That the applicant's rehabilitation was a conditional period, in the absence of which the salary was considered as special leave because the applicant had no comfortable or no income, thus the salary and other benefits for the period. Question not posed by the Department's authority to search the facts and maintain it through the service tribunal Not having encountered any legal weakness or ignoring any material piece of evidence does not raise the question of the public. The significance of the matter was that the Supreme Court did not interfere with the unanimous finding of the facts given by the department authority and the service tribunal. tax advocates from Moro lawyer