Find a Lawyer

MAHMOODALI versus GOVERNMENTOFPAKISTAN

R6 A basic rule, FR 29 was imposed on a large fine civil servant after issuing a minor penalty on the charge and issuing a charge sheet and alleging that he refused the inspecting officer. He said he would check cash and prize bonds to prevent the closing balance. Minor convictions imposed by an authorized officer on civil servants were subsequently reduced to a substantial fine by the timely scale of government employees exercising their modification powers under R6A. On the basis of minor penalties on a government employee, 1973, the allegation was indeed proved, but so far, the allegations that led to the subsequent fine were of a doctrinal nature and the inquiry committee had no corruption. Could not establish The intention of the public servant, although the public servant may not be negligent or negligent in these allegations is no big deal, with the slightest negligence imposed by the public servant justifying the imposition of major penalties on the public servants. The minor penalty was amended to lower the government employee's lower level of penalties. On a timely basis, justification was not given, especially when no period of punishment was specified under FR 29 of the Fundamental Principles, after which severe punishment was imposed on civil servants and being used by public servants. Not to the extent of the offense committed, the competent authority's order to enforce the order maintains that the penalty is set aside and the sanction approved by the authorized officer law firms from Narowal lawyer