ABDUL RAHIM ZUBAIR BUTT versus COMPETENT AUTHORITY
Against the Appellant before the removal of the Service Tribunal from the Service Judicial Officer (Section IX of 1908), the removal of sections 3, 5, 9 and 12 of the Service (Special Powers) Act, 2001 Calling for a telephone call justifying becoming Chief Justice of the Army High Court, the Chief Justice agreed to the results of the inquiry committee, imposing such a sentence on the Chief Justice to cancel his transfer order. Appeal to Appeal of High Court Judges to Appellant's Rehabilitation Restoration After Approval of the Prime Minister's Denial of Their Representation In order to accept Lait's report, Appellant's request for a 132-day service tribunal delay in dismissing the Appellant's request for appeal was requested by the Prime Minister and the Supreme Court on his advice. Had approached Legal experts / advocates, such as the procurement of such. Time was just an exception to the time limit The Supreme Court in its order to file an appeal before the Tribunal Validity stated that the refusal of the High Court judges to accept the petitioner's report was an administrative order that could have been resolved in any case. Or was not approved in the court proceedings, so it did not appear before the Supreme Court. That such a refusal of the High Court was a continuation of the order to withdraw from the service; And that the Prime Minister was not entitled to enjoy representation in a court employee's case. The Supreme Court observed that the appellant had approached the wrong forum which was unable to hear his case. Appellant contacted 132 days after the Chief approved his dismissal order
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
