Find a Lawyer

ALI MUHAMMAD SAMOO versus CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN STEEL, KARACHI

Sections 3, 5, 6, 7 and 10 of the Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Service Appellants were prosecuted by issuing statements of allegations and charges against the enforcement of major dismissal penalties. , He stated that during his posting to the medical department, involved in counterfeit / illegal procurement of stationery items / failed to control emerging life ??? Purchase of life-saving medicines and repair of medical equipment / machinery, from the department After completing the related inquiry, the Applicants submitted notice of the cause and the reason for the inquiry proceedings to be applied to them. Were convicted of the charges and were fined a substantial dismissal of employment, not all appellants were removed under the Special Inquiry Service (Special Powers) Ordinance 2000 as it operated in the form of a questionnaire. Was gone The defendant dismissed the procedure, which was not examined by the Supreme Court employer, to prove the allegations against the appellant against one of the applicants, on the basis of these allegations / allegations, a period of six months. Since there was no reason to resume proceedings against them, appellants were not afforded the appropriate opportunity for a personal hearing. The personal hearing was not just a formality, as government employees should be given full opportunity to explain their position in relation to the charges made / charged during the inquiry process, followed by two other officers. Those who dealt with the appellants were later released. Issue of warning letter, leak famous supreme court advocate from Issa Khel lawyer