Section 9 Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), Section 3A, 3B & 4 Promotion Advertiser Remarks, initially dismissed by appellant appointed as a civil judge, first as Senior Civil Judge and then Additional District and Session. Was developed as. Appellant's promotion as a District and Sessions Judge was accused of having some negative comments in his ACR over the years. There was no disagreement that after appellant's appointment as a civil judge in 1988, his performance was assessed to be good and satisfactory and he was appointed senior civil judge and then additional district and session judge. Was promoted from, but in the years 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002, they received negative comments from the reporting officer in which the allegedly negative comments received by the appellant. The ACR columns will indicate whether they have been evaluated better or on average. And he was not given negative comments anywhere, in column solidarity, the appellant was evaluated on average, if he had an image problem or was not demonstrating good reputation or integrity, such remarks should be given to his A.I. Should have been recorded in Part III of the CR. , But in Part III of the ACR, which also gave rise to the column about the integrity of the appellant, the average remarks were given because the average remarks were never considered negative or below average. After he was called the average officer, who was of average integrity, he could not be given any negative remarks in Part VI, two complaints against his appellant in the ACR, common allegations.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
