MEHMOOD AHMED versus SAINDAK METALS LIMITED THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR
Unconfirmed allegations of maintaining sections 2 and 4 (1973), arts 199 and 212 constitutional petition of Pakistan were condemned that his promotion was withdrawn without giving any opportunity for a hearing and he was retained on the previous post. Had returned, but the authorities had responded. The company was financed and owned by the federal government, so, the applicant was a public servant. The applicant's legal employment was covered by section 2A of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973, and was considered a public servant because the applicant was returned / assuming his position at the previous position / position, such a question Their direct connection to the terms and conditions of service was exclusively applicable to the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal which was not fitness for applicants or was not in the highest order of development or the Service Tribunals Act of 1973. Under the meaning of SA (B), the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain constitutional initiatives. However, the applicant is entitled to special jurisdiction in view of Article 212 of the Constitution 1212 of his terms and conditions of service, as he is a public servant, only under Article 199 of the Constitution The constitutional jurisdiction cannot be ruled out for this reason. Unless they were heard or passed a negative order against them, no show cause notice was issued to them, in which case the constitutional application was dismissed.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
