Find a Lawyer

IQBAL AHSAN ZAIDI versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY ESTABLISHMENT, CABINET SECRETARIAT,ISLAMABAD

The elimination of Section 4 negative remarks appealed to the Service Tribunal Reporting Officer that the appellant was declared "very good" in almost all the columns of Part II (personal qualities), III (attitudes) and IV (skills). In section (a) of Part VI, relating to the overall rating per, the appellant is very good as and in section (b), the accelerator is fit for rapid development and in the pen image, the appellant is diligent. Described as an officer with great ideas and collaboration that was always effective with the latest information on its Sectoral Projects Countersigning Officer, however, each of the two levels was changed in Part VI, the Section VI section. (A) Overall grading was reduced from bottom to bottom. `From \ Average \ and promotion in section (b) to accelerated development \ promotion is not yet suitable for development. However, the Counseling Officer has not made any further change in appellant's ACR, appellant has countersigned officer. Had filed an appeal against the order of It was alleged that the removal by the countersigning officer was definitely unnecessary as there was a sharp disagreement with the reporting officer's review without giving a reason. And contrary to these rules, the appellant was not given any advice to improve his performance; the countersigning officer did not justify his disagreement with the reporting officer in Part VI, it could be concluded that The scarcity made was disallowed and grounded. In the case of the strength of the applicant's eligibility, the delay, if any, in filing the appeal, is to be downgraded in Part VI (b) (III) of the ACR. immigration advocate from Khair Pur Mir lawyer