Find a Lawyer

BRIG. (RETD.) MUHAMMAD ZUBAIR HASHMAT KHAN versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY DEFENCE PAK SECRETARIAT

Arts 6, 129 (g) and 158 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Request Allotment, Proof of Cancellation of Principal Implementation of Audi ultimum Partum Prohibition of Prohibition Exempt underground as being a retired Army officer But the allotment was canceled due to some allegations against him after his retirement, alleging misuse of public funds due to the petitioner's complaint that the land allotment was canceled without any inquiry. Despite the court's directive, the authorities did not file inquiry proceedings against the applicant which led to his We spent request. The privileged document justification Because the authorities failed to submit an order of inquiry despite the directive, there would be strong speculation under Article 129 (g) of the Contemporary Evidence, 1984 that the document was deliberately withheld because that was the case. Used to run against the authorities. If no penalty is taken, in the circumstances, it cannot be recovered that the applicant had deposited valuable property rights in the form of cancellation of his agricultural land and could not be deprived of it by the authorities for this excuse. It was alleged that he was found guilty of misconduct and a negative order was issued against him. Proven by the competent authority, while the applicant was never reported to it by the authorities. Such action on the part of the authorities is unilateral and if an order was passed, the authorities should have taken the court in confidence. The excuse of non-production privilege would be admissible for record / order by the authorities. The right was not accepted immigration advocates email from Morgah lawyer