MUHAMMAD ASGHAR versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY THROUGH ADMINISTRATOR
Sections 3, 5, 6 and 10 of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Petition The applicant was removed from the job by the petitioner alleging that he was required to issue a notice of hearing on corruption charges and without the opportunity of a hearing. Was removed from the job. The applicant's services were questioned, and he was given the opportunity to conduct his trial. The petitioner acknowledged the fact of the inquiry proceedings in his department's appeal, which was supported by the denial of defendant's statement in his concluding remarks. Regarding the applicant's participation in the inquiry proceedings, it was stated that after the admission, the petitioner's counsel argued that the authority authorized under section 3 (2) of the removal of the Sindh (Special Powers) Sindh Ordinance, 2000. Was not notified by. Recommended action against it. And he was not given any opportunity to be heard, he was not underweight because the applicant was provided with the proper opportunity to defend his case as the applicant was dismissed / removed from the job after the inquiry. , Which was evident from the documents kept by the applicant and was given a statement by r \ nAccording to authorities in conducting their inquiry against the applicant
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
