DR. MUHAMMAD AMIN versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, MUZAFFARABAD
Section 44 Writ Petition Maintenance Removal of Civil Service Contract Appointment Applicant was appointed chairman of a contract-based development authority for three years, but was removed from the job before his contract expired. Was given. The issuance of the notice and the accusation against them for removal of the preceding writ petition was challenged on the basis that it was a matter related to the terms and conditions of service, which was the legal limit of the service tribunal. Treatment of special jurisdiction writ petition was allowed in matters relating to the contract between the individual and the state, as it was a more efficient and faster remedy because a civil suit petitioner, under the circumstances, requested the writ jurisdiction of the High Court notification. Claim for treatment by which the applicant was removed before the expiration date. During the term of the agreement, it has been shown that the petitioner had not been heard before the dismissal, when the Maxim Audi Ultium Paretium should be read in the relevant law, unless its application was removed by word of mouth. To be done Three years, but the order to remove the provisions of the e-law that was removed by the employee being neglected and violated, was set aside and the applicant was paid salary, privileges and other benefits for the remainder of his service contract. Was entitled to receive all benefits.
