NAYAR AHMED MAZHARI versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Article 199 Constitutional Application Claim for Removal from the Civil Service Claims for a Grant of Return Benefits The applicant prayed for the reimbursement of benefits returned after the initial appointment in which he was terminated from the job Such benefits were given to a co-worker. A similarly-validated Waldity Petitioner was awarded a substantial removal penalty, while a fellow-worker Petitioner was reinstated, while the mandatory retirement penalty was awarded, while the co-worker He was sentenced to suspension while suspended, and restored his job. The applicant had stipulated that non-payment of arrears for the period during which he was deprived of employment once the competent authority concluded that the order of dismissal was in accordance with law or legal authority. Was not without. And the employee was not at fault in any way, then the job could not be deprived of his salary and other benefits during the period for which the department had wrongly kept him out of the job without making a decision on appeal. , Provided he was able to prove that he was not profitable during this period, the High Court refused to decide whether the applicant remained unemployed for a full term of 15 years during which he was employed. If the evidence is needed, equal treatment can be provided to the applicant. Along with the co-workers who have received some benefits from the authorities, the applicant was rejected because it appears that the applicant and
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
