SYED. HAROON AHMED versus DADEX ETERNIT LTD. THROUGH CHAIRMAN
Articles 11 and 21 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Sections 200 and 249 Maintaining a Complaint The dispute of fact was filed under Section 21 of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act 1997, on the basis of which the Respondents of Public Interest Protection Act dismissed the complaint. Requested to do. The same was filed incorrectly, no legal notice was given to the respondents by the complainant and the complainant was not a victim to file the complaint. Whether the respondent company is violating the provisions of Section 11 of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act 1997, which was in fact a question, cannot be decided on this assumption or assumption except to give evidence to the prosecution and prove the case. By giving the entire opportunity to do so, upon receipt of the complaint from the respondents, a misunderstanding of the request to dismiss the complaint was made at this stage, the Environment Tribunal was given a thirty-day notice to the provincial environmental PR Inquiry and report to the inspection agency, therefore, after the recording of the evidence Will decide, whether he had since fulfilled the legal requirement of notice or brother of a complaint, the deceased, the defendant, respondent was an employee of the company and environmental matters. The risk posed by the complainant was a matter of public interest, in which case the principle of rie bereaved could not be strictly applied even if it was believed that there was a mistake in entertaining the complaint, Again, it would be a question to consider whether such an error was inapplicable or fatal to the complaint process or whether the respondent's company disclosed
