KH. MANZOOR QADIR versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Regulations 10, 11 and 12 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), the termination of the service on the basis of section 42 contract, the termination of employment was based on the contract as deputy director (legal) and his Services were responsible. Termination, one month's notice or one month's salary in lieu, under which circumstances the appellant was not held on a permanent basis or was posted on a regular basis The post of Deputy Director (Legal) was terminated and the appellant's services were terminated. Was terminated due to download. The High Court rejected the written application filed against the termination of the services by the appellant of the project's financial volume and other administrative decisions. Appellant claimed that his actions to terminate the deputy director (legal) and terminate his services were invalidated. Appellant was appointed after the interview and had joined the service of his AP without any reservation or objection to the terms and conditions of the application, the rules of view openly stated that the contract was to retain employees. The availability of positions is subject to the requirement of the employer and if the employer does not perform the required service of a contract employee, he may terminate the service on a month's notice, such condition was specifically mentioned in the appointment. The appellant and the appellant's order did not object to the enforcement of these terms, but accepted the same appellant, in the circumstances. The unusual writ jurisdiction failed to bring an issue to bring his complaint; the High Court correctly observed that the duty to exercise the writ jurisdiction was negligent.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2011
