GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH DIRECTOR-GENERAL, MINISTRY OF INTERIOR, ISLAMABAD versus FARHEEN RASHID
Section 4 and 5 constitution of Pakistan, Article 212 (3) amended the Penal Service Tribunal, jurisdiction of the charge sheet object and the maximum penalty for termination of employment to the jurisdiction by the Service Tribunal for two-year period for the termination of the annual increment. Converted to fines. With no collective effect, officials claimed that since a public servant committed theft, there should have been a criminal case filed against him by a public servant saying he was not charged by the authorities. Was. Against someone who was entitled to know the nature of the case at an early stage, the purpose of the charge sheet was to tell the accused as clearly or / and clearly as possible in which case a government employee was charged and It is intended for the Department with considerable clearance and assurance. Against this and about which he will have to clear himself during the disciplinary proceedings, the NGS Service Tribunal did not advertise the contents of the charge sheet, showcase notice, inquiry report and dismissal order because the inquiry. The officer recommends filing a criminal case against a public servant in connection with the recovery of the stolen money from the complainant on their charge sheet and suspicious contents of the show. The notice did not include such allegations, the Service Tribunal had sufficient authority to convert the larger sentence to a minor penalty, which is why the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the decision given by the Service Tribunal. I failed to raise any specific question of public importance. Appeal for consideration under Article 212 (3) of the Constitution
