Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD WASAY TAREEN versus HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN

Section 5 Balochistan Civil Servants Act (IX of 1974), Section 5 Ad Talk Appointment Verification Service Tribunal Appellant was appointed District and Sessions Judge on an ad hoc basis against this vacant post for a period of six months or until regular appointment. ? Balochistan Public Service Commission extended the period of 6 months but two years after the original appointment, a notification was issued by the authority under which the applicant's ad hoc appointment was not further extended as the competent authority. Did not find behavior and performance. There was no allegation of appellant's satisfaction, however, in the notification no allegation was made against the appellant that no further extension was allowed, saying that the order was not considered to be dismissed or dismissed. Can be given. Refusal to extend service or term employment or extension of term employment would be irrelevant. Denial of extension of ad hoc appointment, regardless of reasons, should not result in any misconduct so as to demand an inquiry, Appellant shows. There was no need to act on the cause notice or to say something against the proposed action. The appeal against the decree was inadmissible because in accordance with their terms of service, the defamatory notification could not be termed an injunction unless the appellant's appointment or the competent authority appointed to another position. There was no appeal against the order. The appeal filed by the appellant provided by section 5 (b) (1) of section 5 of the Balochistan Subordinate Judicial Services Tribunal Act 1989 was dismissed in the circumstances. property advocate from Minchanabad lawyer