Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IRFAN versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

The Section 3 ad hoc appointment employee was previously appointed as a lecturer on an ad hoc basis and nearly two years later his ad hoc appointment was terminated on the grounds that he was not selected by the Public Service Commission, But later the order to terminate the job was withdrawn and the employees were reinstated. The job claimed that when his termination order was vacated and reinstated, it would be deemed that his dismissal order was never present and he would be deemed to be permanent. Serving as The fact that the service since its original appointment and that it was entitled to benefit from the provisions of section 3, provided that all public servants were permanently selected and appointed on a regular basis. Employee dispute was canceled in view of. They were not in service at the commencement of the Act and the benefits of the provisions of Section 3 of the Act can only be extended to a person who is not actually in service or who is out of service. Attendance at the service through another incident may be considered when the employee's rehabilitation after the enactment of the Act does not, in the circumstances, enable him to enjoy the benefits of the act. immigration advocates contact from Chak 4 b c lawyer