Find a Lawyer

ITRUT ALI SHEIKH versus GENERAL MANAGER FINANCE (WATER), WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, LAHORE

RR 2 (i) (ii) (iv) and (vii), 4 (1) (b) (iv), 5, 6 and 7 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), denial of section 4 service of inquiry The Appellate Inquiry Committee dismissed the service tribunal appellant from employment after she filed a charge of disqualification and misconduct, the inquiry committee said in the course of the inquiry, committing a serious misconduct because it provided two witness statements. Was not recorded in detail, saying that witnesses were required to describe themselves. Words he knew about the case, but said that the two witnesses did not make any statement and said that the witnesses could not be used against the appellant because of the material misconduct that caused the appellant to commit serious prejudice. Had encountered and that was the basis for seeking remand for the matter. Defendant's statement presented by the appellant by the latest inquiry was not recorded The hearing of the statement of the defense witness was not recorded to the inquiry committee which was not declared relevant, the correct procedure by Inquiry C Not authorized Exceptionally, because the inquiry committee was required to record the statement of the defense witness first and then make a report in his report to see if such statement was relevant or not, the inquiry committee did not record the examination in the Chief of Appeal Committee. ? Provide the opportunity for the appellant and then the representative of the department to have the opportunity to examine it The witness submitted several documents, but neither the copies of the said documents were provided to the appellant nor did he turn against the appellant. best advocate from Mari Indus lawyer