Find a Lawyer

MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN versus COMMANDANT, FRONTIER RESERVE POLICE N.-W.F.P. PESHAWAR

Sections 3, 5 and 10 of the Northwest Frontier Province Service Tribunals Act (I of 1974), the Appellant appealed to the Section 4 Service, refused to serve as a constable, issuing show cause notices, charge sheets to them. And after being questioned against, he was fired. Because the appellant was over 3 years old at the time of recruitment and after considering the relevant rules regarding his eligibility for 22 days against the prescribed age limit, the appellant was appointed as a constable by the competent authority. Was For more than 2 years the department claimed that the appellant's age was over and that he was fraudulently enrolled and without legal observation, he was not convinced that the department The appellant is convicted of a wrongdoing that is unreasonable. Valuable employment rights have been levied on the appellant, which cannot be withdrawn for any reason. His Inquiry Officer also recommended that the authority be allowed in the upper age limit for one year and 22 days. To be relaxed, but the department excluded the appellant from this job instead of following the advice of its own senior officer. In their entry, which was in violation of the law and principles and the appellant successfully sought bail for a case, sought the intervention of the service tribunal, a written dismissal order was set aside and the appellant was hired. The period from which he is dismissed will be restored to employment. An extraordinary holiday without pay online advocate from Dir lawyer