Find a Lawyer

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB versus AFTAB AHMAD

Section 3 Intra Court Appeal Contract Regulatory Service of Employees Appellant / Department believed that the required qualification for the relevant post was matriculated under Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department Service Rules 1981. , But then through an amendment to the aforementioned rules, the ability of the metric was changed to the FA2 Division. Since the employees did not have the qualifications, they were not considered to be regulated, whereas those who had the required qualifications were regularly regularized because the employees were not considered for this position at the initial appointment. Was permanently eligible and later modified. Will not adversely affect their rights. The contention that the contracting employees had no right to regularize was also without power, as all such employees were given the right to regularize. Since other employees held in similar condition were benefited by notification through the government

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012

• LIAQAT HUSSAIN MALIK v. Malik MUHAMMAD ASLAM 2012 YLR 1386
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ v. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN 2012 CLC 1392
• Ch. MUHAMMAD BASHIR v. Mst. ANSARUN NISA 2012 MLD 1394
• ALI MUHAMMAD v. SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN MINISTRY OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS AND MINORITIES AFFAIRS ISLAMABAD 2012 YLR 1401
• SHAUKAT MEHMOOD v. GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary Agriculture 2012 CLD 1405
• Mst. ITRAT NAZIR v. EXECUTIVE DISTRICT OFFICER, EDUCATION DISTRICT BAHAWALPUR 2012 PLC(CS) 1405
• Mst. SAMEENA AKHTAR v. MUHAMMAD HANIF CHAUDHRY 2012 MLD 1405
• MUHAMMAD KAUSAR IQBAL v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE 2012 PCrLJ 1405

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2012 →

famous lower court advocate from Kabir Wala lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes