RAJA SHAHNAWAZ KHAN versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
The chairman of section 9 and 13, Zakat Council claims to be entitled to the terms and conditions of the High Court Judge Appellant as a practicing lawyer, practicing for over 25 years in his credit, chairman Zakat Council Council's office But in the appointment notification, the terms and conditions were not determined, the Prime Minister directed that the terms and conditions available to the former chairman be provided to the appellant / chairman, the Prime Minister's directive, not the process. The Chairman claimed that the terms and conditions of his predecessor were equivalent to the High Court Judge's writ petition. The writ petition of the Chairman was rejected during the period, subject to the notification on the recommendation of the relevant committee, a concession of Rs. 50,000 was fixed for it. The High Court rejected the request of the Chairman on the ground that as a Government. , Which is capable of setting conditions and the chairman had honorable approval after the approval of his notification in which the chairman challenged the validation of the said notification, primarily on the basis of discrimination in the chairman's office. The foregoing chairman and his successor were like the chairman, an advocate with the same ability, experience and suitability. . They were equally qualified, belonging to the same profession, and were the subjects of AJK, which were equitably placed persons, deserving of equal treatment before the law; , The Constitution did not allow any discrimination, whether it was as an executive order or the chairmanship of the Legislative Act, in relation to the terms and conditions of service.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2013
