SYED KAMAL HUSSAIN SHAH versus CHIEF JUSTICE, PESHAWAR HIGH COURT PESHAWAR THROUGH REGISTRAR, PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR
R7 claimed the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Service Tribunals Act (I of 1974), Section 4 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5 and the 14-year increment grant appellant's grant, appointed as a civil judge in BPS 17 in 1988. It was the week of March, 2008, that he realized that for the first time since 1988, 1988, he had not been given an increment. That when he said that the learned competent authority had applied for his grant before the appellant in his appeal or at the stage of argument 31 31 2008 (after about 20 years), he did not specify that position. How has time and knowledge been gained? As an Appellate Judicial Officer (after 20 years), he is aware of the fact, he may have filed for late condolences, but no such application was filed as long as the concept and appeal The user cannot have a carefree attitude. Every day should be condoned and explained for the reason of the action, but it was not Appellant, otherwise he could not avail of R-26 (b) of the fundamentals as he was not serving six months in a single phase. I was doing. On a related scale
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013
