Find a Lawyer

GHULAM NABI SOOMRO versus CHAIRMAN WAPDA AND 2 OTHERS

Section 2 (AA), 3 and 5 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Service Termination of Appeal Service A major penalty was imposed on the appellant after the service of the showcase notice, but It was appointed by the Appointment of the General Manager of the Establishment, which was the authorized authority in the case of the appellant, without issuing the final showcase notice and inquiry into allegations of serious corruption, incompetence, corruption and corruption. But the service was issued and approved by the Chief Engineer who was disqualified from the cause of notice and dismissal order which was served by the appellant. There was no competent authority in the dismissal cases, it was not only approved by the disqualified authority, but it was approved without issuing the final showcase notice and without formal departmental inquiry to pass. How the appellant was retained after the applicant was unable to withdraw from the job after being charged, had already retired from employment at the age of employment, restoration order not approved He could, but he would be entitled to pay back all the benefits he had received from his retirement date. registration advocate from Shadiwal lawyer