HABIBUR REHMAN versus DEFENCE SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENT OF SINDH COMMUNICATION
Under section 42, 54 and 56 Civil Procedure Code (VV 1908), Section 9 and O VII, R 11 Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), Section 4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 1212 of the Special Relief Act 1877 Declaration and order prohibited. Promotion plaintiff (public servant) is being displeased with the selection board's decision because it did not recommend for a case to be filed to dismiss such decision. To be determined in accordance with its promotion promotion policy. And as interim relief, respondents should be barred from issuing a publicity notification on the basis of the recommendations of the Selection Board Trial Court, the case under O VII, R 11, CPC was dismissed because Article 212 of the Constitution In favor of the claimant. The jurisdiction of the Civil Court was not restricted in all matters relating to the terms and conditions of the public servant, but only for matters whereby the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal established under Article 1212 (1) of the Constitution was extended. That was, finding the trial court's justification was correct. The question of implementing a particular promotion policy could be a matter of Germany for the terms and conditions of service, and thus itself would not be sufficient to attract the application of Article 1212 of the Constitution and force the dispute of the Claimant Service Tribunal. The entertainment app went from the Service Service Tribunals Act of 1973 to Providence (B) of SA (1) for a thorough trial of a Talent Court fitness determination that the plaintiff had before the service tribunal. And the case was banned under Article 212 of the Constitution, thus claiming the right to promote a sustainable plaintiff
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
