Find a Lawyer

NASIM ALI KHAN versus DIRECTOR-GENERAL, INTELLIGENCE BUREAU, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD

Sections 2 (AA), 3 and 5 Government Servants (Appeals) Rules, 1977, R5 (3) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Compulsory Retirement Appeal Appellant, who is the `ACIO \ (BPS 11). ) Was set as, was. Eventually he was promoted to AD (BPS 18) and, as a result of his disciplinary action, the re-appellant was designated as \ DD \ (BPS 18), after issuing notice of the notice he was given a job notice. Retired from employment after issuance, and charge sheet for allegations of corruption, corruption and misconduct, etc., with prior effect, the appellant's mandatory retirement order was issued by the functioning officer as an officer and authority. , While in the case of appellant the competent authority is inferior to the position of Secretary Establishment Division of the Secretary Establishment Division. Because it was not authorized. Start of disciplinary proceedings and mandatory retirement order against the appellant All disciplinary proceedings against the appellant, illegal in the circumstances, in the eyes of the law, without any legal authority and mandatory retirement penalty on the appellant. , Which was an illegal patent action by the authority under which the entire disciplinary action against the appellant was thwarted. , Especially when the authorities did not show whether they were explicitly authorized to pass a prescribed order under any law or regulation or whether retaliation was taken against the appellant. That the service tribunal could not be sustained by resorting to a serious illegal, arguing of its merits. Under this case, the appellant pakistani advocates Hub Chowki lawyer