Article 212 (3) The seniority dispute between direct-hiring public servants and progressive respondents was promoted on a temporary basis on 28 10 1976, and his appointment was made regular in 1984. The petitioner was directly employed in 1987, long after the defendant was appointed on a regular basis in the in, against an vacant position to promote the petitioner's claim that the defendant had Appeal Tribunal was not guaranteed to be effective, service order was not guaranteed, appeal was denied
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
