Find a Lawyer

AFTAB AHMED KOLACHI versus EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PERSONAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, ZARAI TARQIATI BANK LIMITED

R 4 (i) (b) (iv) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), after dismissing the charge sheet to the service appellant, dismissed the employee with a statement of allegations in connection with the irregularities imposed on him. went. His main charge against the appellant was that he deliberately knew about 2 182 loans against false and fraudulent passboxes knowing that such passboxes were fake and false, irrespective of the attractiveness of the allegations, It was the legal right of the appellant to defend it in its suit. Accusations of misconduct were made, but the appellant was not given any opportunity to defend himself through any reasonable and legal inquiry. No investigation has been made to ascertain the truth or the charges in the charge sheet. , Because the appellant was never informed of the inquiry if such a fortunate inquiry is done, he will be treated as such because the appellant had no need for it. Information about any such inquiry, as a result, was not examined by any of the prosecution's witnesses in the presence of the appellant who had not had the opportunity to examine any of the prosecution's witnesses during the alleged inquiry. That it was illegal and contrary to the principle of natural justice except for investigative proceedings, nothing was left. On the basis of a preliminary inquiry, only the appellant was found guilty of the offense, especially when the appellant / accused was not provided with any opportunity to examine the witnesses, in view of such contradictions, the appellant No charges against best advocate from Chohar Jamali lawyer