Find a Lawyer

NOOR MUHAMMAD versus PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD

The Appellant's claim for Section 2 (a) and 4 of the Special Judicial Allowance by the employees of the Federal Service Tribunal prayed for the approval of the Service Judicial Allowance, which was filed by the Appellate Officers of the Supreme Court, Federal Law and High Courts / Officials were being paid. The allowance was denied on the basis that he, as a civil servant, is not entitled to say that employees of the Supreme Court, Federal Shariah Court and High Court allowances do not fall under the definition of "public servant", As provided in Section 2 (a). ) Because of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 because it was stated that employees were not connected to the affairs of the Federation judiciary, it is definitely an organ of the state. But his main task was to provide justice and resolve not only the citizens' disputes, but also between the citizens and the state, between provincial governments and the federal government's federal government's dispute arising from the affairs of the Constitutional Courts. Special resolved. This court was given to the constitution that the employees appointed by the constitution said that the courts were only employees of those courts and they were not government employees who were exercised by the Judicial Allowance Chief Justice of Pakistan under their R3. I gave it to the Supreme Court employees. Rules of the Supreme Court (Appointment of Officers and Servants and Terms of Service and Services), 1982, and Federal Shariat Court Employees were granted by the Chief Justice of this Court in exercise of powers obtained under Federal Rule R5 (Terms) And Rules, Service of Staff) Rules 1982, The Federal Service Tribune has no such power jobs for advocates from Multan lawyer