Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF versus CHAIRMAN, WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, LAHORE

Rr 3, 4 (1) (b) (iii), 5 & 7 Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), Section 4 Service Appellant was dismissed from the employment on some of the charges against him, the appellant. Had alleged that no formal investigation was conducted. Despite the seriousness of the allegations, he was held against it and his appellant's conduct was condemned. The reason for this was that there could be no inquiry against him, despite several bar notices and letters of clarification to the appellant, he did not bother to present his answer. He did not even appear for a personal hearing. Several notices were issued by authorities to present his defense, but he failed to do so when an employee intentionally failed to present his defense. Failure to plead guilty was a failure to deny the allegations meant that more documentary evidence was available on the record than the undisputed documentary evidence of the allegations to show that a letter of explanation and showcases were sent to the appellant and to him Notice was also given for the day before yesterday. Government hearings were considered to properly perform public functions, but there was no reason for the appellant to produce a record against the appellant, but appellant knew all the explanatory letters and allegations leveled against him. But he deliberately denied the allegations. The claim was denied that he should not be heard and the allegations leveled against him were false; the failure to substantiate the allegations leveled against him, the appellant actually admitted. Pakistan, top advocate family court from Hayatabad lawyer