SHAH NAWAZ versus GENERAL MANAGER (OPERATIONS) PAKISTAN RAILWAYS HEADQUARTES OFFICE, LAHORE
Sections 3, 5, 6 and 10 were even served outside the service of the appellant, used after six years to prove the charge against the appellant if the appellant had committed a crime. So, why the authority slept and did not take any action against the appellant and therefore forced the authority to use it so old that the event to prove a charge against the appellant had no basis because an event or event, If any, the Service (Special Powers) Ordinance came into force after the dismissal from 2000, which allowed the prosecution in the charge sheet Reference was made. Their power was exhausted, the last sentence was used as evidence of a 1994 incident that never happened. Y restored past and closed events so that the appellant could be dismissed while resorting to appropriate procedures. And the Authority was unable to conduct any investigation, even in the case of major fines the order of dismissal against the appellant was set aside and the appellant was reinstated from this date. Was done. Dismiss it with all the benefits that come back
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
