MUHAMMAD ASIF RANA versus LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
Section 5 Letter No. S (R) 3542 S and GAD 4 8/65 SO X 111, Dated 12 2 1968, Paragraph 4 and 8 The complaint of the Judicial Officer regarding the deletion of the annual secret report remarks was that the annual The remarks on the question in the secret report were written by an officer who was not authorized. Write, as the judicial officer did not serve under this reporting officer for ninety days, with a minimum of Letter No. S (R) 3542 S and GAD 4 8/65 SO X 111, including 12 2 Includes 1968, has been instructed to create a reporting officer. For the purpose of writing a report on his work and conduct, he had a valid opinion of his subordinate work, ninety days, and at least compared to the time period to disregard the recorded report regarding that period. The Judicial Officer did not work under the supervision of the reporting officer for a fixed period of three months and was associated with the concerned station as District and Sessions Judge before the posting of the Reporting Officer at this station. Was. Establishing a fair opinion by the reporting officer on the actions and conduct of the e-judicial officer was beyond the question Remarks could not be based on personal information and information as this letter violated paragraphs 4 and 8 of Letter S. Is. (R) 3542 SO&GAD 4 8/65 SO X 111, dated 12 2 1968, neither the reporting officer was able to record the negative comments in the annual secret report of the judicial officer nor was it justified. , The High Court directed the removal of the negative comments listed. Appeal was allowed accordingly in the annual secret report of the judicial officer
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
