Find a Lawyer

NOOR ALAM versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, SINDH KARACHI

RR 7 (i) (a) (b), 9 (b) dismissal of the Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), Section 4 Service Appellate Appellant, after the charge sheet service charged with bribing the constable. Dismissed. And to register a false case against a person was required to submit his response in 7 days, but the authority dismissed him on the next day of service of charge sheet on the appellant appellant without waiting for the appellant's response. ? Under the R9 (b) of Sindh Police (Qualification and Discipline Rules, 1988), the provisions of the R9 (b) of Sindh Police (Discipline and Discipline) Rule 1988 can be obtained only if the accused is Providing an opportunity to show cause was not reasonably practicable, but in the present case giving the appellant the opportunity to show cause was practically as if, by acting against it as before, The showcase was presented with the notice, while the authority neither stated nor kept it on record, to resort to R9 (b) of the Sindh Police (Qualifications and Discipline) Rules 1988. Opportunity or justification for stating any document that the reasons were filed for the reasons they were demanding, the impugned order of dismissal of the approved job against the appellant, was unnecessary and invalid. The appellant was mentioned in the showcase notice on only one allegation, while in the dismissal order two more accused were also included, including two other constables who were dismissed on the same charges. The demand was made and it was reinstated to be like the appellant jobs for fresh advocates from Fateh Pur lawyer