Find a Lawyer

SAEEDAHMEDKHAN versus AZADGOVERNMENTOFTHESTATEOFJAMMUANDKASHMIR

2, 5 to 7 and 12 removal from employment Government employees were removed from the job after issuing a charge sheet and inquiring against them on duty charges, the official started proceedings against the authorized officer. The instructions issued by the Authority were required to decide within three days of receipt of the directive under R5 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (Qualification and Discipline) Rules 1977. Whether or not an inquiry is necessary, they violated the mandatory provisions of the roll as individual charge sheets. About five months after the receipt of such instructions by the Authority Inquiry Committee set up for inquiry against a public servant, no evidence was recorded and no written defense by a public servant was filed Were not allowed and no evidence was recorded on the allegations contained in the affidavit charge sheet recorded without their statement, the public servant was denied because of his legal right to examine witnesses. Which may be submitted by the Department and shall be submitted by the Defense Inquiry Officer or the Inquiry Committee Verse was deprived of the evidence, was required to examine witnesses in support or defense of the accused oh. The failure of the Committee to administer the Oath to a public servant, thus violated the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (Rules and Regulations) 1977 and the statement of the public servant before the Committee would not be legally pure and only Cannot read against. Become legal against any civil servant famous high court advocate from Buchay Key lawyer