Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN QURESHI versus DIRECTOR, MILITARY LANDS AND CANTONMENT, RAWALPINDI

R (3 ()) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Upon completion of compulsory retirement base service of applicant, Rule 44 (3), Pakistan Cantonment Service Rules 1954, after which action was taken against the petition. Was. Violations of Islam's orders even though it did not provide notice of the appropriate action to take on the proceedings and did not provide an opportunity to show cause for such action, but despite the Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court According to the judgment, SC 304 in Pakistan v Big PLD 1987, under which 8 (44 (3), Pakistan Cantonment Service Rules, 1954 was declared a violation of the orders of Islam), the present constitutional petition could not succeed. The Supreme Court's decision could not have taken the effect of disappointment when an invalid order was passed. The S-Rules 1954 was valid and the operating constitutional application was rejected in the circumstances how to become a advocate from Rangoo lawyer