Section 8 Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009, Arts 60 (13) and 71 Government Employees' Sanitary Reality Controversy Applicants and Respondents were appointed in different years, with diplomas within one year of appointment on different dates. Was made a condition of regulating his services at the time of appointment. Respondent arrested seniority list in front of Chief Justice in writ jurisdiction; Chief Court directed to place applicant in serial number 1 in the list of securities; hearing of Chief Justice during writ petition, authorities Has not issued any sanity list but a memorandum has been issued by the authorities stating that the seniority will be enforced from the date of regular appointment and not from the date of approval of the diploma, whether it failed to establish. Whether or not their service was brought. On a regular basis or he was still performing his duties as the Judge of Chief of Temporary Employment, the court was silent in this regard and the court should have discussed such aspect of the case before reaching a final conclusion. No problem was raised in this case, in which the decision passed by the Chief Court was silent on applying the sanitary rules. Under section 8 of the Civil Servants Act, 1973, the rules or seniority were governed, and in the same decision passed by the Chief Justice, the same matter should have been examined and discussed but this was not done. Accepted the writ petition and relieved it. Defendant and Seriously Verify the List of Senators That Defendant's Chief Court Actually Disputes
Related judgments — Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit, 2010
