Find a Lawyer

KHAWAJA NASIRUDDIN versus CHAIRMAN, PNSC, KARACHI

Section 13 Recovery of overpayment The civil servant was discharged from employment at the age of 60 as of his date of birth, as stated in his previous service discharge certificate, in the discharge certificate The date of birth of the employee was stated on 15 6 1938. The claim of the public servant was that according to his birth certificate issued by the municipal corporation, the date of his birth was 15 6 1944, at which time the appointment of a public servant was the birth of a public servant. He accepted the date of 15 6 1938, though he was a civil servant at the time of the appointment of the employee. Ray was mentioned, but the matriculation certificate was no authority that could verify the date of birth. Thereafter, the public servant kept mentioning different dates and when the date of the public servant's birth was not related to each other, no question was asked. Authority and Government Employees Worked until the Date of Retirement, which was 30 11000 Government Employees After the retirement age, the Authority should have taken action against those who had not been employed by the Government employee for more than two years from the date of his retirement. After serving for a long time, the Authority ruled that all payments made after his retirement date were illegal and were ordered to be adjusted against his final liabilities. An order of justification could not be approved with the former effect, and the authority could not recover much money because it had served in that period. The public servant argued that if he was satisfied the official got it. property advocates from Haveli Kahuta lawyer