Find a Lawyer

MIAN AZIZ AHMAD versus SYNDICATE, BAHAUDDIN ZAKRIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN

Sections 3, 5 and 10 of 13 Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), Section 4 impose fines from service against appellants who were engineers and 13 charges of defective construction of the convocation hall. Complaint processed on behalf of The negligence of the appellants with the contractor, not only caused huge financial loss to the University, but also the human lives, the inquiry was carried out in this case and they were dismissed by the inquiry committee on all the allegations against the appellants. Relative to the time when the Inquiry Committee conducted the tests and compiled the results, nor was its reports put into serious challenge when it failed to summon the author of the committee, only the appellant was accused of investigating it. Security measures taken can only be done at the touchstone, such as the opportunity to examine witnesses, which was denied by the appellants, was not presented to the inquiry committee on the basis of a complaint, in which case the inadequacies Appeals were not provided with any opportunity, what should be considered a reasonable opportunity to deny the allegations. Because the only piece of evidence on record was the report of a committee consisting of unqualified and non-technical persons, which set aside the dismissal orders for dismissed employment against the appellants, with the instruction that a committee consisting of three engineers. Have enough experience and free reputation. The matter is being investigated by De Novo attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Panjan Kisan lawyer