ASIM MAHMOOD versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
5 and 25 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Article 44, the appointment rule for the appointment and retention of the terms of service, without the authorization of the law and the unconstitutional rules and advertisement The challenged on the basis of extreme violations, which were litigation between the parties, had already been challenged in the writ petition before the High Court, which the High Court ruled under the affected rules. And the ad is a quota violation. The High Court directed that the competent authority make provisions. Advocate for the applicants for the adjustment in the quota related to the appointment through preliminary recruitment, admitted that against the judgment, a leave application for appeal was filed before the Supreme Court which was also dismissed. But relief was already extended to accommodate quotas for petitions, and all other government departments were being followed by the initial recruitment, and it was ordered to be strictly followed, The existing writ petition was not manageable, in the circumstances
