Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AFZAL versus DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER

Section 4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 199, 212 and 4 constitutional application for public service was terminated and it was filed under the rules before the appellate authority, but the appellate authority did not provide it with the proper opportunity. Appeal dismissed. The government employees filed a constitutional petition against the orders of the appellate authority, which was requested by the state authorities, in this case, a matter related to the terms and conditions of the government employee and the High Court in this case the constitutional petition. Cannot follow Article 212 of the Constitution read with section 4 of the Service Tribunals Act 1973, while the High Court had sufficient jurisdiction to instruct the public jurisdictions to act in accordance with Article 4 of the Constitution. It was passed using its constitutional jurisdiction. It was also disclosed by the Appellate Authority that the government employees were approved without notice and for any reason the appeals / representations of their subordinates under duty were decided for reasons and public. The workers were also tasked with deciding the appeal of a public servant after issuing a notice and delivering it. After the proper hearing was not the same, the order passed by the appellate authority was not lasting in the eyes of the law on the touchstone of the principles of natural justice, the High Court set aside the order issued by the appellate authority under which Appeal / representation will be filed by a public servant. The decision should be considered a delay and provide the parties with a hearing immigration advocates email from Malakwal lawyer