Find a Lawyer

versus

Punjab Government Employees (Talent and Discipline) Rules 1975 R 9 [as amended on notification 1, 1982] Compare the original rule and punishment of a government employee convicted of a morally backward offense. 9 Amendment and Discrimination Amendment R 9 Code of Conduct, no new offense or obligation was created, but the previous responsibilities offended the use of morally compromised words rather than \ morals. And in fact has devised a process of action rather than abandoning it. The amendment of the wishes of the authorities, however, has not altered the law and merely removed the ambiguity, limited the application of the law, and the modification applicable to the implementation of the procedures provided may be argued that the original R9 was a restriction. Neither the provision nor any applicable provisions which were convicted for conduct related offense had to be dismissed by the authorities immediately under the original roll of e-showcase notice service. Could not relinquish and defend against appellants Sections 420, 468 and 471 and Section 5 (2) of the Code The case was registered under the Act of 1947 and the convict was sentenced by a special military court and sentenced to five. For years, however, his request for mercy was suspended by the Martial Law Administrator Authorized Authority, which is initiating disciplinary proceedings against the appellant under R9 and has since been dismissed from special employment following notice of notice. And the appellant's hearing has not been suspended. Part of the punishment, p us immigration advocates from Kotli Loharan lawyer