Find a Lawyer

SULTAN KHALID MASOOD KHATTAK versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY

RR 4 (1) (b) (iv), 5 and 6 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), section 4 service dismissed appeal was charged by him and charged with the inquiry. They were charged after being imprisoned. The negligence and irregularities in the auction of plots had served the appellant 28 years without any record. The inquiry officer had misunderstood the evidence and the wrong result in respect of the appellant's liability in the allotment of plots through auction. Arriving at the authorities did not accuse the appellant and no negative report was made against him in his long service career, the applicant's auction case was held before the posting of the appellant and the Cantonment Board The bid was accepted by resolution and the board approved the pricing Or who had submitted the others. The bidders had shown by such facts that all the important steps and transactions of the auction of plots took place before the appellant assumed his responsibility in this regard. No evidence against the appellant was available against the appellant, unlawful consent, embezzlement, etc. The only negative consequence that could have been drawn in the disciplinary proceedings was that the notice of extensive inquiry was taken, the appeal. The provider should be careful and certify matters personally. However, in the long service carrier, no single fault should be allowed to stain the applicant's flawless carrier. The impend order was set aside and the appellant returned all the when you need a advocate from Larkana lawyer