REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE versus MUHAMMAD NAVEED HASHMI
Article 212 (3) was dismissed on a charge of corruption as a judicial officer on a charge of restoration of a civil service. The service tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the judicial officer and restored him to employment, if the judicial officer had a permanent reputation. Being corrupt, the same vacancy and the annual intelligence reports could not be decided even if it was the only tool to assess the credibility of the corrupt otherwise the annual secret reports were silent in this regard during the posting of the deposed judicial officer. Had there been any complaint, the position would have been different and some remarks could have been given in the annual intelligence reports, the Judicial Officer was never given any advice to improve the scope, the competent officer did not agree with the inquiry officer's recommendations. The Judicial Officer was deported but argued that the one who had the education, the authorized officer, could be said to be logically correct but not legally. There was some evidence to prove the allegation of perpetual credibility of corruption: Authorities failed to record anything to substantiate such a serious allegation, examining all the evidence presented by the Inquiry Officer. To support the allegations of corruption and to give the Judicial Officer reasonable and reasonable reasons, which were not to be set aside and rightly brought under consideration, and the Service Tribunal Prosecution Judicial Officer dismissed the allegations of corruption against the Service Tribunal. Had failed to prove. All the evidence was examined with the use of intelligence and the result was in accordance with the law and the evidence which justified
