Find a Lawyer

CH. AMJAD HUSSAIN versus PUBLIC PROSECUTION DEPARTMENT THROUGH PROSECUTOR-GENERAL, PUNJAB, LAHORE

Section 8 (3) Rules of the Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service (Terms of Service) Regulations, Pakistan Article 199 Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Section 3 Int. Court of Appeals Adhoc / Temporary Deputy Prosecutor General (DPG) Appeal to Prosecutor General for retaining his services temporarily vacated by promotion against 50% vacant posts of APG / DPG vacating the constitutional petition by the High Court Verification applicants did not participate in the selection process for regular appointments because prosecutorial applicants did not apply to any law Did not try to enforce their claim to be considered as a mere convenience and practical nor the ability or the ability to hold such positions. Public office should reflect transparency, and the absence of qualified people to qualify for the office of justice does not mean that disqualified persons should be made to maintain the same court so that the intra-court appeals are excluded.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012

• BAGOO v. GHULAM HUSSAIN 2012 MLD 624
• MUHAMMAD IRFAN v. State 2012 PCrLJ 625
• MUHAMMAD YAQOOB v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, ATTOCK 2012 CLC 625
• TAJ MUHAMMAD v. State 2012 YLR 630
• MUHAMMAD ASIF SAIGOL v. Mian MUHAMMAD SHAFI 2012 MLD 633
• GHULAM QADIR FARAZ alias BABAR v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION SADDAR KAMOKE 2012 PCrLJ 638
• MUBASHIR HASSAN v. GHULAM SARFRAZ 2012 CLC 640
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN alias ASIF ALI v. State 2012 YLR 641

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2012 →

when you need a advocate from Pishin lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes