Find a Lawyer

ABDUL RAZZAK versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB

The Punjab Civil Servants Act 1974 section 12 (ii) compulsory retirement case of the appellant was examined and postponed for one year till their representation against the final report, which was negative, was decided. However, Appellant's case was brought up again by the Review Committee. For this recommendation, the appellant must have shown only the negative entry of the appellant by the retired ACR dossier which was recorded by the Reporting Officer for any misunderstanding otherwise the applicant would be of good service. The record was obtained Appellant was given a large number of testimonial credentials and letters of appreciation and was treated by him. Along with reporting, the officer equivalent to the majority of the counseling officer and, in turn, the appropriate departmental powers for development, after the review committee's retirement decision, begins to submit material for the retirement order offer and Justify the action already done before. No comment, keep in mind, no one is automatically taking over the city matters to them, the representation against the appellant's representation has been said that those remarks were yet to be decided and against it. The review committee did not have enough material to take action as appellant's name is included in the officers' list. After only retiring at number one, his case was delayed for a year after deliberation, the authorities' estimation of the disappearance was based on speculation and was against all the principles of conscience of justice, justice and good conscience, Retirement was notified and appellant promoted advocate for immigration from North Wazirstan lawyer