Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IRFAN versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, MULTAN

R 4 (1) (b) (iv) Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Appellant was dismissed from service on the charge that he facilitated double drawing of pension by another employee. Had contributed to provide. In this case, the statements of some witnesses were disclosed only in the case where their involvement was being conducted without any further investigation, giving them the full opportunity to defend themselves and to examine them. Were able to argue that a deputy usually had nothing to do with it. The pension provision was primarily responsible for the said fraud, when the direct-to-work executives accepted the responsibility and did good work, it was also illegal to terminate the job. Was gone and the fact finding could not make the inquiry possible. Considering the alternative of regular inquiries, if treated directly with the personnel involved, there is every justification to increase the benefit of the doubt from the distribution of pensions to the appellant who is a deputy counselor posted in the pension section. There was no surveyor The appellant was instructed to recover from the date of the defective order with the benefit of all the consequences. best advocate from Tibba Sultanpur lawyer