MUMTAZ MUNAWAR KHAN NIAZI versus REGISTRAR, LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
Section 8 [as amended under Punjab Civil Servants (Amendment) Act (III of 2005)] Punjab Subordinate Judicial Service Tribunal Act (XII of 1991), Section 5 Promotion, Appellate Qualification, Appellant's Eligibility The promotion of the post was considered by the Promotion Committee in April, 1997, by the District and Sessions Judge, followed by a review in December 1997, and the same negative remarks from September 1999 to December 1999. Delayed for a term of three years. The representation was dismissed and the appellant was promoted to Additional District and Sessions Judge in October 2002, however, in April 1997, however, the representation for pharma promotion was rejected, because the appellant. After his retirement, his ability to appeal was objected to. The appeals were not amendable, which was amended in section 8 of the Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974, which was amended on 13 4 2005, the potential effect was rejected by the appellant on 8, 2004 red; ie Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974. Prior to the amendment of section 8, it was stated that in the circumstances, the applicant had no application before the amendment in the matter of retirement and the appeal was even before the said amendment, according to the appellant, the pro forma promotion. The appellant was eligible for promotion in April, 1997, and the negative comments, which resulted in the postponement, resulted in his removal, when his representative. If accepted, there was only one reason to delay the promotion of the appellant. Negative comments, which were dismissed, have been promoted by the appellant as a pharmaceutical since 1-4 1997.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
