Find a Lawyer

E.D.O. (EDU.) BAHAWALNAGAR versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM

Section 4 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 212 (3), Appointment of Service Appellant Approved by the Service Tribunal against the charge of restoration of the appellant, as the Appellate Appointment letter was forged. After approval. Cyclo Style Farm Validity Record did not tell Appellant's appointment that the competent recruitment committee had retired the District Education Officer from issuing several bogus appointment letters. The Service Tribunal did not deal with the Department's factual determination. Appellant's appointment. The letter was bogus The department properly dealt with such bogus letters through a standard order.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2012

• PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Colonies, Board of Revenue, Lahore v. Ch. ABDUS SATTAR 2012 SCMR 1007
• MUHAMMAD YAR v. State 2012 SCMR 1014
• I.-G. PUNJAB, LAHORE v. IQBAL MEHMOOD 2012 PLC(CS) 1015
• MUHAMMAD TANVEER v. FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 2012 SCMR 1022
• Mst. NASEEM AKHTAR v. G.M. (P & D) WATER, WAPDA 2012 PLC(CS) 1041
• AKRAM UL HAQ ALVI v. JOINT SECRETARY (R-II) GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, FINANCE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PLC(CS) 1045
• Dr. SHAHNAZ WAJID v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Establishment Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad 2012 PLC(CS) 1052
• Syed MEHMOOD AKHTAR NAQVI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN throughSecretary Law 2012 PLD 1054

All Supreme Court judgments of 2012 →

family advocate from Garh Maharaja lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes