MUHAMMAD NAEEM versus CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN TELECOMMINICATION COMPANY LTD.
The notification was communicated through Section 9 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Promotion Intelligence Appeal for Service Tribunal appellant, under which the respondent who was his junior was the most officially Assistant. Developed as a Divisional Engineers Appellant, he was named Serial Number 28 of the BPS1 to Senior list of BPS15 and still considered developing for the first time as an Assistant Engineer. Was not made and the position and salary of Assistant Divisional Engineer (BPS 17) at the relevant location was denied. ? At the time the private respondents were all juniors, but were promoted as assistant engineers and allowed as assistant divisional engineer (BPS 17) appellant, in the case of 5% of their specific quota in terms of development. Was harmed on the basis of eligibility for equity. Completely discriminated on both counts, namely 5% as well as 75% of quota officials had made a wrong view, whereby they eliminated the juniors who were exempted from the competition to remove the appellant. I was senior to him in all respects. Appeal was accepted with the directive that the authorities should prepare the final seniority list and have appellant's cases before the DPC and appeal from the day their juniors were promoted. Developer All legal benefits
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
online advocate from Kotla Arab Ali Khan lawyer
