Find a Lawyer

BIBI SHAHJAHAN KNOWN AS SHAHJAHAN SAIMA versus AZAD GOVERNMENT THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

R67 (2) Amendment to the birth of Article 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VII of 1974), there is no doubt that it was provided in sub rule (2) of Rule 67 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Financial Code. Which would be deemed to have been made for the purpose of the declaration of age, at the time of admission to government service or for that purpose, absolutely final. Since no such revision should be allowed later for any purpose, however, what was said was nowhere provided when a substantive claim was made. Then the government was deprived of necessary reforms. The High Court had the authority to issue directives to the public workers who compelled them to perform legal duties.

Related judgments — High Court Azad Kashmir, 2010

• REHMAN BEGUM v. HASSAN MUHAMMAD 2010 PLD 21
• SHAUKAT AZIZ v. AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary, Muzaffaraabad 2010 PLD 23
• MUHAMMAD AMEER KHAN v. MEHTAB AHMED KHAN 2010 CLC 34
• SARDAR KARAM DAD KHAN v. CHAIRMAN, AJ&K COUNCIL/PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN through Secretary AJ&K Council, Islamabad 2010 PLD 47
• Mst. HAFEEZA JAN v. ALTAF HUSSAIN 2010 CLC 83
• JAHANZEB KHIZER v. AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary 2010 PLC(CS) 109
• MUHAMMAD ISMAIL v. Mst. CHANNA BIBI 2010 CLC 112
• Ch. MUHAMMAD RASHEED v. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR BOARD OF EDUCATION, MIRPUR 2010 PLC(CS) 145

All High Court Azad Kashmir judgments of 2010 →

lawer from fb area from Rahimyar Khan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes