Find a Lawyer

MST. RAFIYA LATIF versus SECRETARY EDUCATION, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR

Rr 4 (6) (i), (ii) and 9 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Section 47 (3) publicity of the public servant who was initially appointed as the Junior Teacher. B15 was promoted as Senior Teacher. , Under the order of the Divisional Director of Schools, to legalize its publicity order, thereafter approximately four months after its development, Assistant Director Schools issued a curriculum on the direction of the Divisional Director Schools, By the time of promotion of the public servant (according to the selection committee's recommendation) through their advertising words, the divisional director schools had lost the ability to promote a public servant because of the senior teacher's post during this time. Was raised to B16 and because of this. For this reason, on the recommendation of the Selection Board by the public servant, it can be promoted in accordance with the provisions of the relevant law. Neither the eligible candidates nor the Minister in charge approved the illegal exercise of any such jurisdiction by the Divisional Director Schools, without recommendation of selection, committee or selection by the Divisional Director Schools. Government employees had no legal right to a publicity order. The Board was illegal and did not give any right to a promotional / public servant and was rightly set aside by the Secretary of Education and the appeal was upheld by the service tribunal against setting such an illegal order. Was deleted as solicitors from Dinga lawyer