Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD WASEEM versus GENERAL MANAGER (OPERATIONS), PAKISTAN RAILWAY HEAD QUARTERS, LAHORE

Sections 3, 5 (4) and 10 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Service Exclusion Appeal Sentencing was imposed on the appellant because he was charged with the same. The notice was issued that it had committed gross misconduct and infringement. Based on the preliminary investigation, the appellant was fined, but the appellant denied any allegations leveled against him, without any formal investigation against him, without any formal investigation of the grave in this case. The cause was not disclosed and serious illnesses were appearing. In the retaliation proceedings against the appellant, who allegedly deposited the same amount of misappropriation on the same appellant, but instead of taking a soft view, a substantial dismissal penalty was imposed. Yes, the invalid order could not be retained. The instruction to the authority to restore the appellant and to prevent D will be the result of the inquiry into the Novo-disciplinary proceedings against him under the same allegations / charges within a specified period. immigration advocates email from Yazman Mandi lawyer