Rr 4 (1) (b) (ii) He was charged after filing a notice of cause for filing an appeal against the Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), section 4 compulsory retirement. Was acting discriminatory against senior officers of the authority and criticized the policy of the department, etc. Appellant was proceeding due to low salaried employees being the president of Class III Government Employees / Employees Association. Questions whether the appellant is working for the benefit of public servants / employees. Legally or legally or his motions were serious and he was abusing his position as President Association and he had criticized the officers, which can only be determined by a detailed investigation. Said that the questions had much to do with the recording of the evidence which the appellant should have. It has been given the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses attached to it and the evidence presented against it, but it did not have a fly in the appellant's alleged statement in the case of the appellant did not contain any objectionable material / content. His comments were praiseworthy for being in the interest and interests of the employees of the department, and being president of the Appellant Association was legally defending that purpose. As well as members of the association, the department did not violate the rule of law by protesting for the appellant's better working conditions, while the organization threatened its rights by dismissing it without regular inquiry. That is, the appellant's order to impose a substantial retirement penalty, set aside
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
