Find a Lawyer

JAMEELAHMADMALIK versus SECRETARY,ESTABLISHMENTCABINETDIVISION-.ISLAMABAD

RR 2 (4), 5 and 6 Government Employees (Practices) Rules, 1964; R22 mandatory retirement penalty enforcement service after serving a charge sheet and making appropriate inquiries on the allegations when a government employee was responsible. Yes, the administration and army officers were publicly criticized for using humorous and derogatory language. Which was widely publicized through newspapers to create unrest and hatred among the common citizens and Army officers of the Pakistan Ordnance Factory, a sensitive institution, also inquired officers during the interrogation process by civil servants and non-governmental sources. Healthy environment. Government employees, under the Civil Servants Act, 1973, were obliged to resolve their grievances before the Constituent Assembly within the four corners of the law and not in the same manner as misconduct was committed against a civil servant. The inquiry against a civil servant was done in a very fair manner. And the civil lawsuit did not express any complaints, or mismanagement, against the appointment of an inquiry officer who had inquired against them. The allegation of mismanagement was fully established through a fair and impartial inquiry; the competent authority rightly passed the order under which a government employee was sentenced to mandatory retirement. advocates from Alipur lawyer