Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AYUB BHATTI versus HIGH COURT OF SINDH THROUGH REGISTRAR

Prior to the extension of the Section 3 reverse reversal appeal, it was discussed with the appellant for the relevant period listed in the appellant's AC. In his immediate appeal, he was arrested, stating that he had made negative comments after considerable delay. It said that negative comments were not endorsed with reference to any testimony or justification and that no counsel was made for the appellant before recording the negative comments under the challenge, delaying the communication of the ACR. In this regard the case of the appellant was canceled in view of the fact that even the reporting officer, because of the many judicial functions, the possession of the authority was retained, only the delay in committing the negative comments in the AC, in the circumstances the report was sad. No serious witnesses were made against the perpetrator. In the circumstances against the reporting officer, there was no justification for the allegation made against the appellant by the reporting officer so far the appellant's stand was that no consultation was made before recording the negative remarks, Suffice it to say that in the fifth (b) of the two AC rupees in question, especially the reporting officer mentioned it, during the monthly investigation he was given remarks on the lessor of matters, his In the rules of the inspection the facts were highlighted and the remarks were conveyed to them, there was no reasonable justification that they should be properly examined. The theory was presented by the appellant. Apart from proper and appropriate consideration by the Chief Justice, the Appellant had the opportunity of a personal hearing while the Chief Justice. best advocate from Wana lawyer