Find a Lawyer

SHAFI MUHAMMAD SAND versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH

Article 212 (3) Service dismissal There is no mention of any minor penalty for a public servant anywhere in the restoration of an order of the public servant. Fines cannot be imposed and appropriate investigations can be made. The rules, as a result, the public servant had the right to retaliate under relevant rules that had not yet been proven correct, it appears that the public servant, while granting leave, seriously condemned the Supreme Court, dismissing the application. Changed the appeal for and directed that it be listed within the stipulated time

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2009

• FAROOQ IMRAN v. NAEEM AHMED SIDDIQUI 2009 SCMR 157
• Dr. MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ MUFTI v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Chief Secretary 2009 SCMR 160
• NAZIR AHMAD PANHWAR v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Sindh 2009 PLC(CS) 161
• TAHIR JAVED v. State 2009 SCMR 166
• AZIZULLAH SHEIKH v. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LTD 2009 CLD 173
• SHAMEEL AHMED v. State 2009 SCMR 174
• PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LIMITED through Chairman v. MUHAMMAD SAEED WAZIR 2009 PLC(CS) 176
• MUHAMMAD FAROOQ v. Mst. NOOR BIBI 2009 PLD 178

All Supreme Court judgments of 2009 →

female advocates from Haveli Lakha lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes