Find a Lawyer

ABDUL MALIK versus PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN

Appeals against Sections 3, 5 and 6 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Appellants were removed from the job after the charge sheet was removed when, during the posting of this, another employee He had committed a fraud from his association with which he was fined. There was irregularity in his removal from the job because the authority / director general did not appoint any person who was in violation of the relevant law. The inquiry was made in the form of a question-answer procedure. On which the appellant was convicted. In the eyes of the law, the inquiry can be very durable. The inquiry committee's finding was based on a hearing because there was no direct or indirect evidence in the record. The main charge against the appellant was that the appellant's termination of writings and his I had made the transition easier. The accused was also charged with cheating / embezzling, which caused damage to the official investigating appellant, and again he failed to inform the administration of the facts related to the commission of fraud by the accused. Or, the top appellant had appealed that he did not know about the prosecution and that it was not possible to report against his boss / accused as a subordinate. Most appellant's error can be termed "negligence" for which the appellant has more than 20 years. A clean record of services as a low-paid subsidiary, which was also considered before being subject to major penalties under certain circumstances, top civil advocates from Attock lawyer