Find a Lawyer

M. ASLAM SYED versus QUAID-E-AZAM UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD

Section 33 and (27 (i) Appointment of Professor Emeritus Inquiry Officer from the Government Employees (Talent and Discipline) Rules, 1973, Rr 8 and 18 [as amended by Cairo University] The error of action against misconduct could not be assigned to Emeritus as an Inquiry Officer to conduct an inquiry and to determine the consequences which were purely an exercise of the administrative and executive function inquiry officer's conduct. Otherwise, it was not a fair and impartial university that was used by government employees (talent and discipline). The promise was made in accordance with 1973. It required notifying the \ authority \ and \ the authorized officer, but not the reason and notice of the reason sent to the professor under the signatures of the registrar (which was not authorized). Sheet had no legal authority Inquiries such as conducting inquiries were corrupted In addition to validating showcase notices and charge sheets, the Kaz notices contained in the proposed action issue were also illegitimate with the D-Professor and about penalties. It was also important to mention that in order to get the inquiry officer's desired result, his report was adhered to. The desire to appear before the Syndicate was acted upon, indicating that it sought financial stability and relinquishment of legal requirements. Conditions were not guaranteed famous lower court advocate from Machh lawyer