Find a Lawyer

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY NORTHERN AREAS GILGIT versus MUBEEN KHAN

Article 60 (13) Civil Service Service Term Job Contracting The initial appointment of employees was made in 2005, which lasted until the end of the contract's extension, the Chief Court directed that the employees be restored. Explicit orders related to the extension of the justification for rehabilitation Respondents' contract from time to time creates the impression that the competent authority intends to absorb it as a regular employee but due to consultant intervention, the health of the Northern Territories Neither the continuation order in his employment was approved nor was he told of the termination of the contract. The Supreme Appeal Court directed the competent authority to strictly dispose of the law in order to proceed in light of the departmental conduct without prejudice to the respondents' rights.

Related judgments — Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit, 2010

• PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary N.A. Gilgit v. KEHKASHAN BEGUM 2010 GBLR 95
• RESIDENTS OF CHAPORTE BALA through Representatives v. RESIDENTS OF CHAPROTE PAIN through Representatives 2010 GBLR 98
• KARAKORAM INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY through Vice-Chancellor v. NUMAN BUTT 2010 GBLR 100
• GHULAMUDDIN v. RAHIM ULLAH 2010 GBLR 104
• MUHAMMAD YOUNUS v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Chief Secretary N.As. Gilgit 2010 GBLR 107
• NAJAF SHAH through Akbar Ali Shah v. AHALIAN MOUZA KHALTARO 2010 GBLR 112
• MUHAMMAD ALI v. HASSAN 2010 GBLR 114
• SHAH ZAMAN v. State 2010 GBLR 116

All Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit judgments of 2010 →

immigration advocates phone number from Pirpai lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes