MUHAMMAD TARIQ SAEED versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY FOREST, WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES DEPARTMENT
Sections 13 (5) and (6) of the Constitution of Pakistan, Arts 199 and 212 Constitutional Appeals Department authorized authority Option DNO Inquiry Principal Service Tribunal, the applicant was in the jurisdiction of the Punjab Government and his complaint was that once Atonement was paid by them. Authorized Authority, Cannot Order a DW Inquiry When receiving an Inquiry Report, three options or courses were open for the Authorized Authority, which could either forgive the defendants or punish them, or order a DWO inquiry. If it is satisfied with the inquiry process. The authorized authority could not exercise more than one option and could not order a de novo inquiry when it was granted amnesty by the competent authority under section 13 (5) of the Punjab Employee's Eligibility. No new inquiry or de novo inquiry was sought under the Discipline and Accountability Act, 2006, or a case could be registered under section 13 (6) of the Punjab Employees' Competence, Discipline and Accountability Act 2006 Whereby the complaint of the applicant cannot be made a matter of appeal to the service tribunal which has Had no jurisdiction to troubleshoot. Was unapproved and unlawful against the applicants and did not come in the way of the High Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 212 (2) of the Constitution, Art, 199; The order approved by the competent authority to hold the Inquiries were allowed under circumstances without illegal and unlawful authorization
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
