Find a Lawyer

KAZI CHAND MUHAMMAD versus PROVINCE OF SINDH THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

RR 167 and 171 Sindh Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973), Section 4 Appeal date, Appellant's case was that his date of birth was 209 1947 which was recorded in his service book on appellant. Alleged that the seniority list was notified by the department, its date of birth 209 1944 was disclosed. And since the authorities did not file any document in support of their version that the date of the appellant was 209 1944, the appellant relied primarily on his service book, which, in the appellant's service book, was the date of birth. 20 was recorded as 20, and the document's reference to the evidence on which the date of birth was written, nor the certificate was recorded, depending on the nature of the document, Although it was imperative that the service book lacked the urgent need to register a date of birth. The Sindh Services Rules manual had failed to substantiate that the applicant had a date of birth on 209 1947, which he claimed was the subject on which he issued his case, the primary school certificate, through a civil surgeon. Physical fitness certificate and date of birth were the basis. In the service book, there was no reason for the change in the applicant's date of birth on the list of seniority at a later stage in Suny 2003 and and later in the top civil advocates from Shahdad Kot lawyer