Find a Lawyer

BASHIR AHED SHAIKH versus CHAIRMAN, PORT QASIM AUTHORITY, KARACHI

Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Service, were imposed on the mandatory retirement appellant when the appellant served unofficially for almost 28 years after being charged with misconduct. Were given. For this long service he was neither punished under the Government Employees (Talent and Discipline) Rules 1973 nor was his negative report made a negative entry nor did the appellant issue a show cause notice. Was made and the inquiry committee did not investigate under section 6 of the removal. The Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, did not examine any witness of the prosecution in the presence of the prosecutor, nor did he undergo a cross-examination by the fact-finding inquiry, was defective in the circumstances and required retirement from the service. Heavy sentence was not sustained in the eyes of the law The cross-examination of the appellant was conducted by the inquiry committee which was not legally justified The appellant was not afforded any opportunity or the opportunity to present a witness for his defense. The appellant also asked the appellant to submit his explanation about the negative finding of the inquiry committee. Was not provided a copy of the report. The appellant's alleged mismanagement did not result in any financial loss from the authority, under which the appellant was fined. Previous Impact: No Executive Order Can Work With Depression Even on this score the impeachment order was unlawful, not equivalent to the mismanagement of the cigarette carton because appellant was given a large penalty for mandatory retirement from service. , While a slight warning to his partner solicitors from Jhand lawyer