لاہور ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا ہے کہ پاکستان میں لوگوں کو جھوٹے مقدمات میں ملوث کر دینے کی شکایت عام ہے عدالت نے حکم جاری کیا ہے................
93 . Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi Coming towards the main case, it is also a perfectly-established proposition of legislation that when an inquiry is conducted on charges of misconduct by a public servant, the Court is concerned with determining whether the inquiry was held by a competent officer or whether rules of natural justice are complied with. Whether the findings or conclusions are based on some evidence, the authority entrusted with the power to hold inquiry has jurisdiction, power, and authority to achieve a finding of fact or summary. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of a fact or evidence in the Stricto-Sensu, implement to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and summary acquire support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty in the charge, however, that is issue to the procedure provided under the relevant rules and not otherwise, with the reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not work as appellate authority to re-enjoy the evidence and to arrive at its independent findings around the evidence.
Therefore, this petition is found being not maintainable and is dismissed along with the pending application(s), along with the petitioners may seek out remedies through the civil court process as discussed supra. Read more
Ordinarily, the burden rests with litigants to appeal rulings (together with These in distinct violation of proven case legislation) towards the higher courts. If a judge acts against precedent, as well as the case will not be appealed, the decision will stand.
لاہور ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا ہے کہ پاکستان میں لوگوں کو جھوٹے مقدمات میں ملوث کر دینے کی شکایت عام ہے عدالت نے حکم جاری کیا ہے................
کیا ایف آئی آر درخواست گزار کی رپورٹ پر درج کی گئی تھی اور اگر ہاں تو کیا اسے اس کے خلاف ثبوت کے طور پر استعمال کیا جا سکتا ہے؟
be established without an iota of doubt in all other jurisdictions) will be inferred. This is actually a horrifying reality, an incredibly very low threshold for an offence that carries capital punishment.
لاہور ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا ہے کہ پاکستان میں لوگوں کو جھوٹے مقدمات میں ملوث کر دینے کی شکایت عام ہے عدالت نے حکم جاری کیا ہے................
department concerned shall deliver the complete set of ACRs on the concerned officer to DPC very well in advance cases for promotin(Promotion)
Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Const. P. 8180/2019 (D.B.) Saif Shujaat and Ors V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-223999 Tag:Offered the legal analysis on the topic issue, we've been on the view that the claim of the petitioners for retroactive regularization from their First contract appointment and promotion thereon, from that angle is not really legally audio, Moreover promotion and seniority, not absolute rights, They may be matter to rules and regulations If your recruitment rules of the topic post permit the case with the petitioners for promotion may very well be deemed, however, we've been clear within our point of view that contractual service cannot be regarded for seniority and promotion given that the seniority is reckoned from the date of regular appointment and promotion depends upon seniority cum Physical fitness, issue to availability of vacancy subject towards the approval on the competent authority.
Apart from the rules of procedure for precedent, the weight given to any reported judgment might depend upon the reputation of both the reporter plus the judges.[seven]
3. Rule of Legislation: The court reiterated the importance of upholding the rule of regulation and ensuring that all institutions function within their constitutional mandates.
13309-B of 2010 to be weak types of evidence and the evidentiary value whereof would be noticed for the time from the trial. The investigation of this case has already been finalized and, So, confirmed custody in the petitioner in jail is unlikely to serve any valuable purpose at this stage.”
In 1996, the Nevada Division of Child and Family Services (“DCFS”) removed a 12-year outdated boy from his home to protect him from the horrible physical and sexual abuse he experienced suffered in his home, also to prevent him here from abusing other children while in the home. The boy was placed in an crisis foster home, and was later shifted all around within the foster care system.