Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARIF versus ASSISTANT COMMERCIAL, OFFICER-I, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SUKKUR

Rr 4 (1) (b) (iv) and 6 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), the appellant was dismissed from the job after section 4 was dismissed and he was charged with corruption and Accordingly, the official cash charge sheet was not issued. Appellant's requirement of R6 (1) of the Government Employees (Talent and Discipline) Rules 1973 dismissed the job without investigating the serious allegations against him and the reasonable opportunity to cause it, and without the appropriate opportunity. Done. The defense authority cannot be allowed to claim that the allegations against the appellant have been proved, the impound order was set up along with the instruction to the appellant to restore the appellant under the service, the appellant's defense After providing the full opportunity, De Novo was also directed to inquire. famous lower court advocate from Ahmadpur East lawyer