Find a Lawyer

MISS GULNAZ BALOCH versus REGISTRAR, BALOCHISTAN HIGH COURT, QUETTA

Article 199 Constitutional Jurisdiction High Court Jurisdiction Civil Service Advertising was shortlisted for the post of Civil Judges / Judicial Magistrates Petitioner and was included in the list of eligible candidates, but they were so high in the interview. Was unable to select the applicants for the selection process. Was it that a panel of High Court judges could not be unfairly assigned to the interview marks, without any bias and fairness notification in compliance with the order passed by the Chief Justice's Registrar? Was released. The High Court Constitutional Jurisdiction Judge or Judges could not be appealed against orders passed by the Chief Justice or Registrar by the Court Petitioner for which the High Court Selection Committee was interviewed but some marks were given. Were. There could not be enough numbers to select a selection committee that could not be challenged as Ed and asked him if the committee was a good judge in which to form an opinion and decide on the candidates' abilities and abilities. The Sana'a High Court was not required to interfere and assert its opinion in changing the decision of the Selection Committee except when the same error occurred. Excluded due to a constitutional request not valid \ r \ n \ r \ n

Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015

• MUHAMMAD AYAZ KHAN JOGEZAI v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN STATES AND FRONTIER REGIONS DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2015 PLC(CS) 346
• SOHAIL HAIDER v. State 2015 YLR 366
• SANAULLAH v. State 2015 PCrLJ 382
• BAKHTIAR v. NASRULLAH 2015 CLC 385
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. MIRA JAN 2015 YLR 440
• ALLAH DINA v. State 2015 MLD 460
• ROZI KHAN v. MUHAMMAD ASIF 2015 PCrLJ 465
• ABDUL SATTAR KHAN DURRANI v. PROVINCE OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary 2015 PLC(CS) 489

All Quetta High Court Balochistan judgments of 2015 →

best advocate from Rangoo lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes