SIKANDAR ALI versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, SUKKUR
Section 3 and 5 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Time Scale Reduction Applicant Appellant, who served as a firefighter for 15 years, was accused of stealing oil from tank wagons. Notice of cause of action was issued. Appellant was fined in section B of Section 6 for deducting three steps in the time scale and recovering the money on the appellant and only one officer in section B served as the competent authority in the case of appellant. Could, but was fined by the Assistant Mechanical Officer on the Appellant who was not a B-Section 18 officer. Given that, under the circumstances, the Authority had taken action against the appellant on the basis of factual investigations, but not the proper inquiry, the inquiry officer merely recorded the statements. Employees and appellants were not provided with the opportunity to examine witnesses, which is a serious weakness. The competent authority has not yet conducted a proper inquiry. The allegations have been strongly denied by the appellant. There was no evidence in the record that a copy of the inquiry report was provided to the appellant in preparation for the proper defense. Such weaknesses seriously violated the appellant's rights. The serious nature of the re-inquiry option cannot be predicted, simply because the department's case was dismissed on grounds of legal merit, the case was remanded to the department to be filed against the appellant. The de novo dispensary can take action. One charge within a specified period \ r \ n
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
