Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ WAFA versus CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB/AUTHORITY AND 2 OTHERS

Section 3, 5, 6, 7 and 10 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), section 4 ens censorship of fines imposed on them after allegations of appeal censorship charge sheet and inquiry against them. Was imposed. The complaint filed by the complainant was sent to the appellants within seven days, but they failed to produce the report despite 22 reminding authorities, while on the one hand, the authorities defamed the inquiry officer by saying have done. It was not confirmed by the record relating to the submission of the report by any of the applicants prepared by the Inquiry Officer and on the other hand the same inquiry report was awarded to the appellants for an uncensored penalty and two other co-accused were declared as innocent charge sheets. Was the basis for giving. There was a contradictory document as both appellants were found liable for not responding to 22 reminders, though this was practically impossible because the personal time period of the appellants was not the same and both were posted at the same time. Was not done, possibly due to procedural errors committed by the relevant authorities, the appellants were not delivered according to the law due to the hurry to punish the appellants, which showed that the required reports were appealed. Was presented by one of them, but was retaliated or hidden by the Secretariat staff. . Syed Secretariat's staff was also responsible for not submitting a timely report to the Secretary of Defense - effective orders for imposing penalties on appeals were found to be lawful and morally justified, setting aside the circumstances. online advocate from Bewal lawyer