Find a Lawyer

MANZAR KHALID, EX-EXCISE AND TAXATION INSPECTOR versus DIRECTOR-GENERAL EXCISE AND TAXATION PUNJAB, LAHORE

R4 (1) (b) (V) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), the Appellant serving as the Excise and Taxation Inspector, Section 4 was dismissed, appeal without prior permission and notification. The department took action on the charge of absence of duty. He was dismissed from the job after issuing a show cause notice and a previous action was brought against him as he did not participate in the inquiry process. The appellant had requested that he submit a medical certificate as well as medical leave and that the inquiry should have been carried out through a formal process, but the competent authority had concluded that the appellant. The charge against him was proved and the employment dismissal was given to the appellant who did not submit the charge sheet reply, the inquiry officer should have acted strictly in accordance with the law. The formal notice of the departing inquiry officer's appellant's request for action by the appellant was not approved, which was incorrect because the department officials did not submit a letter denying the medical leave by the appellant. The discretionary authority could not be ruled out at Tha Medical grounds, however, a second medical opinion could be obtained, but this did not happen. Was the appellant fined for refusing his request and without giving him the formal information, otherwise the authority had done more than the proposed penalty in the showcase notice, which had to be removed from the job More penalty than removal from employment famous high court advocate from Gadoon Amazai lawyer