Find a Lawyer

GHULAM SARWAR KHAN versus MUHAMMAD NASEEM

Sections 14 and 99 (2) (e) Conducting the General Election Order [Chief Executive Order No. 7 of 2002], Article 8D (2) (e) Disqualification of candidate Retired candidate (defendant) Sue Southern Service I was present The last date for filing nomination papers was 20 8 2002, the election date was 20 8 2002, the election took place on 10 10 2002, the resignation by the respondent on 26 11 2002. Received a letter demanding repayment of some of the money given to him by the letter dated 30 12 2002 and the company accepted his resignation on 25 3 2003 against a period of 3 months notice when 7 12 in 1998. The respondents believed that he was never employed in the company, but rather as his assigned administration was Trainee, who was terminated on 7-12 1998 and the head Despite the WAS Tribunal and the Supreme Court ruling, he was never restored or absorbed. That only scholarship was given to him which could not be called salary. And that upon approval of his resignation, he had refunded the benefits received from the company. Accurate respondents were offered a fixed amount in the form of a stipend in exchange for such services required to meet the Company's expansion program, the pay order was equivalent to a pay tribunal, dated 13 10 2002. The defendant was reinstated to the job, which was proved by the fact that the company had resigned from the company by the respondent's statement of salary receipts in his account and his checks thereby. The request for immediate acceptance indicates that the tendering date of resignation list of supreme court advocates from Noorpur nooranga lawyer