DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAWALAKOT versus KH. ABDUL RAZZAQ
R8 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Section 47 (3) Appeal for compulsory retirement The Supreme Court respondent admitted the allegation leveled against him, the authorized officer recommended that he must Retire from the job and send the matter to him. The authority, which passed its mandatory retirement service tribunal order, accepted the appeal, set aside the mandatory retirement order, and the employees resigned from their jobs were allowed to file an appeal against the service tribunal's decision. That no charge sheet was presented to the employee and even his statement was not provided to him and that the authorized officer did not decide whether an inquiry was necessary in the case and he did not decide. The competent retirement authority did not even consider the matter proposed for the major penalties for evidence. No opportunity was provided. The employee was not allowed to examine the witnesses presented against the employee, under the R8 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (Talent and Discipline) Rules 1977, it was necessary for the authority to issue the notice and Provide the employee with an opportunity to be heard before a major penalty is imposed, but no such opportunity has been provided. The competent authority does not appear to know the procedure of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (Qualifications and Discipline) Rules 1977 and It did not apply its mind and the matter could not be decided without following the procedure laid down in the Rolls Compliance Authority. Permission to initiate fresh action against the employee because he has been under trial for the past six years
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2010
