Find a Lawyer

AFTAB GULZAR versus CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD, LAHORE

Service tribunal before discharge of service from the jurisdiction of the R4 Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), Section 4 Punjab Local Government Ordinance (XIII of 2001), section 2 (i) (vi) and 193 service tribunals. The prosecution proceedings against the appellant were initiated. Assign the responsibility to the Government employees charged with the dismissal and recovery of money in the service of Local Councils under the Punjab Local Councils Service (Talent and Discipline) Rules, 1990 and the authority employees. He may pay the duties to promote the work. In the interest of the people, with the help of the city government, but withdrew their salaries from the treasury of their respective councils, known as Local Funds and District Provincial Accounts Employees and members of the Local Council Service, Punjab Local Government Ordinance. Unlike 1979, who honored members with a special status. The services of the Local Council as Government servants were not classified in the Punjab Local Government Ordinance. Appellant was employed by the Local Council for all intents and purposes in the Appellant's case, since 2001, the action against the Appellants was in the Punjab (Services Special). Powers) Ordinance has not been made under the removal of Punjab since 2000, hence they cannot be called government employees. The controversial order against the applicants was passed when the Punjab Local Government Ordinance was in the field in 2001 although proceedings could have been initiated earlier when the appellant was not a civil servant at the time of filing an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. Because of which they had no jurisdiction. If the appellant's registration advocate from Jehanian lawyer