Find a Lawyer

GHULAM RASOOL PANWAR versus FEDERAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY (F.I.A.) THROUGH DIRECTOR-GENERAL HEADQUARTERS, ISLAMABAD

Section 3 and 5 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Compulsory Retirement Penalty Appeal to the Service Tribunal The major penalty for compulsory retirement is the issuance of notice of cause and against them on charges of negligence / ineligibility. Upon investigation, the appellant was imposed. The Inquiry Officer found that on the day of the date of illegal immigration, the Appellant was negligent in performing his duties. The inquiry officer added that the appellant had to be vigilant and failed to meet the needs of such an inquiry officer. However, it was noted that none of the witnesses had stated any contrary intention by the appellant. Or that the appellant had taken any financial advantage, the inquiry officer had clearly stated in his inquiry that the appellant could be held liable for negligence and disqualification and in this case there was no denial inquiry officer. It is recommended that the appellant be punished. Under the reasonable removal of the Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, none of the minor fines were found guilty of any of the motives of the prosecution, and any purpose of obtaining monetary benefits through the appellant must be served. The heavy penalties for retirement were tough. Mandatory Retirement Sentence, Sub Inspector (Section I) to Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) was ordered to reduce rank reduction for a period of three years, restoring Appellant from the date of compulsory retirement. Was ordered. famous high court advocate from Sangote lawyer