Find a Lawyer

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN versus MUHAMMAD TAYYAB

Para 11, Articles 1989, Serial Nos. 28 and 29 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 27 Competitive Examination Participated in the Competitive Examination against the reserved seat for Azad Jammu and Kashmir and the Second Service Commission on Merit for certain seats. Reduced the number of specific seats to one, because one seat was allocated to a candidate in advance who appeared in the exam in 1994 with 95 respondents who would otherwise be eligible for appointment on the merit , Was excluded. Their right to appoint a High Court in the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction, set aside the decision of the authorities that the Chairman Federal Public Service Commission was empowered to reduce the number of seats under paragraph 11 of the Competitive Examination Rules 2002 Was. Under Paragraph 11 of the Competitive Examination Rules, 2002, the authorities had the right to fill in small or large numbers of vacant posts from the declared places but this rule allowed them to reduce the quota / ratio allocated to the Azad Jammu and Kashmir area. And furthermore, the authorities were not authorized to allocate a seat to a candidate who appeared in 1994. After a six-year period, the years would be vacant in 2002 when officials did not show that the 95th division in 1994 was more than half in 1995, so that it could give additional candidates. The same quota will not be deducted from the same quota in the next year, it can be deducted in the year 2002, but there was a period of six years before which the seat could be cut by the authorities. Didn't show reasonably well. In this case the ratio or quota in the year 2002, as a result of justification or justification immigration advocates email from Tibba Sultanpur lawyer