Find a Lawyer

SAADAT ANWAR versus GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN

RR 2 (1) (E), 4, 5 (1), 6 (7), 7 (1), (8) and 12 Balochistan Service Tribunals Act (V of 1974), Section 4 was dismissed. After making a charge sheet and holding inquiries on some of the allegations, such as paying your contractor in advance, corruption and creditworthiness, etc., the inquiry officer initially set no date and in the absence of a site Visited action. As a public employee was not affiliated with a public employee during the inspection of the scene, only one witness was examined and was told that the witness was recorded without providing the opportunity to inspect in the absence of a public employee, non Investigation officer checked records in presence. Providing a record to the Inquiry Officer was under legal obligation for a civil servant who was never told about an inspection that violated the relevant rules, but in the official case the servant did so. Was violated by the Balochistan Civil Servants (Qualifications and Discipline) Rules, 1992, R6 (8), which is the inquiry which is the basis for the dismissal of civil servants who violated the rules. Has gone and is violated. The principles of natural justice were invalid and had no legal effect. The public servant paid the contractor in advance upon completion of the work and there was no damage to the public exchequer by making advance payment to the contractor even after inspection. The rules were committed by a public servant, the punishment for his dismissal was not justified by the public servant. us immigration advocates from Jalal Pur Jatan lawyer