Find a Lawyer

DILSHAD KAUSAR versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT (PRIME MINISTER)

Section 2A and 3 of the Independent J&K Roll of Business, 1985 AJM and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VII of 1974), in respect of the appointment of section 44 written application, justified the petitioner on the recommendation of the Public Service to the Headmaster (B. 17) was appointed. Following the appointment of the Commission applicant, an anonymous petition was sent to various departments of the government alleging that the applicant was MA (Third Division) and that he had illegally obtained an MA History (Second Division) petitioner. Was claimed by the Accountant General, Accountability Bureau and DPI schools, and concluded that the petitioner / complaint was filed anonymously against the applicant. The premise was false and then, under the notification issued by the Educational Secretariat, the competent authority has notified the same. A new inquiry was directed against the applicant on the basis of the injunction. And the deputy secretary education was the appointment of an inquiry officer who issued a letter for further processing, the applicant challenged that the notification and letter issued by the inquiry officer. Earlier, the matter had already been questioned by various authorities and complained of being lied to, fresh investigations on the anonymous application were without legal authority. Secondly, the notification that the refusal to be published in the Official Gazette was a violation of the law. Thirdly, the inquiry is being initiated on an anonymous complaint without any evidence and the fourth is that the notification was without jurisdiction, although some officers have said immigration advocate from Kotla lawyer