Find a Lawyer

BASHIR AHMAD BHATTI . versus COMMISSIONER, MULTAN DIVISION, MULTAN.

R 4 Suspension Inquiry Officer convicted a public servant of not mentioning any particular property in the Annual Statement of Assets. Authorized government officials observed that allegations of negligence by government employees could be avoided as it would be such an easy warning to be cautious in the future. Meet the end of justice, but despite such observations rather than the suggested warning process, Caesar's slight conviction was imposed by thinking that the rule meant a simple warning while the rule was a punishment, rule 1975. Under, simple warning was not a punishment, the commissioner's order, considering that the suspension of a civil servant was not justified in extraordinary leave was not a suspension of the job itself, because in any case there was a trial court inquiry against the civil servant and No criminal case where honor is bad or orders of power are brought against someone else. Wanted. Government employees were left with the direction that the suspension period should be treated as P tax advocates from Dargai lawyer