Find a Lawyer

CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE versus IRSHAD AHMAD

RR 4, 6 and 7 Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), Section 4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 212 (3) Repeal from the service, requested a retaliatory action against the accused / Government employees on the charge. Gone. The government employee appointed the central teachers when such appointments were banned and that all such appointments were made without the approval of the recruitment committee and other accused / respondents provided facilities. He said that appointments were made through false and vague appointments. He said the central suspect, who was a former deputy district education officer, and the defendants / government employees did not say at all that the education department was a little lax. The central suspect was punished with a slight reduction in salary even though he was paid, but the respondents were severely punished for service charges. Sketching, confusing, and without evidence was equated against respondents about how respondents facilitated fraudulent appointments and who were the beneficiaries in a respectful and serious job. Which was a good example of the abuse and abuse of authority of the tribunal, which rightly set aside the dismissal order passed against the defendants. The authority was terminated by the service tribunal, which was strictly in accordance with the law, set the rules of justice, and, on good grounds, appealed to the Supreme Court against the trial tribunal's decision to reduce the merit. Could not be interrupted, in particular it was rejected list of supreme court advocates from Kallur Kot lawyer