Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE versus D.F.O. AND 3 OTHERS

Rr 3 (a) (c) and 4 (b) (ii) (iii) Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), Section 4 fine collection and mandatory retirement from the service appellant, who served as jungle. Was giving, enforcing. The guard, accused of failing to protect the trees from damage and his activities suffered heavy damage to the government, was charged with a huge fine for tree damage and a mandatory retirement appellant from employment. Such an order states that the compensation for the trees as provided for in the schedule increase was irrelevant to the crime. The appellant had prayed that the actual loss of the tree be reduced to recovery, despite the mandatory retirement penalty, most should have been the appellant. Appeal was partially accepted instead of a better rate of burden on the actual cost of the missing trees The mandatory retirement penalty was maintained, but the recovery of the money was reduced with dering. advocate from Nowshera lawyer