In the event the employee fails to serve a grievance notice, the NIRC may possibly dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer hasn't experienced a chance to answer the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In certain cases, the NIRC might allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to include the grievance notice. However, this is frequently only carried out If your employee can show that they'd a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. From the present case, the parties were allowed to guide evidence and also the petitioner company responded to the allegations as such they were well conscious of the allegations and led the evidence as such this point is ofno use to get looked into in constitutional jurisdiction at this stage. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Abdur Rahman Source: Order: Downloads 204 Order Date: 04-FEB-25 Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
A guide to online and print sources of Washington State court opinions, rules, forms, and jury instructions
However, decisions rendered from the Supreme Court on the United States are binding on all federal courts, and on state courts regarding issues with the Constitution and federal legislation.
Sign up for E-mail Notification of new opinions The cases listed below have had opinions filed for them within the last fourteen times. The following information is accessible for Just about every case: Information Sheet - Click a case number to view case details, which include signing JusticesJudges and participating attorneys.
This Court may possibly interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer within a method inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the manner of inquiry or where the summary or finding attained through the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. In the event the conclusion or finding is like no reasonable person would have ever achieved, the Court could interfere with the conclusion or the finding and mould the relief to really make it ideal into the facts of each and every case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority is the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-appreciate the evidence or maybe the nature of punishment. On the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified by the decision of the Supreme Court during the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Read more
These past decisions are called "case regulation", or precedent. Stare decisis—a Latin phrase meaning "Allow the decision stand"—would be the principle by which judges are bound to this kind of past decisions, drawing on recognized judicial authority to formulate their positions.
27 . Const. P. 4002/2011 (D.B.) Ibrahim Noor V/S Pakistan International Airlines Corporation & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi Even, if a petitioner was acquitted inside of a criminal case following a conviction, in NAB Reference No. 20/2011, this does not automatically lead to exoneration from departmental charges based around the same factual grounds. Even though a writ under Article 199 is offered in specific limited situations, it truly is generally not the appropriate remedy to contest a dismissal from service based on these charges, particularly when the employee was afforded a full opportunity to cross-take a look at witnesses and present his/her defense but didn't encourage the department of his/her innocence.
For those who find an error from the written content of the published opinion (such as a misspelled name or a grammatical error), please notify the Reporter of Decisions. TVW
On June sixteen, 1999, a lawsuit was filed on behalf of the boy by a guardian advertisement litem, against DCFS, the social worker, plus the therapist. A similar lawsuit was also filed on behalf on the Roe’s victimized son by a different guardian advert litem. The defendants petitioned the trial court for a dismissal based on absolute immunity, as they were all performing in their jobs with DCFS.
Article 199 of the Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other suitable remedy is provided by regulation." It really is very well-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust accessible remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether Those people remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more
12 . Const. P. 245/2025 (S.B.) Qurban Ali S/o Qasim V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi The legislation enjoins the police to generally be scrupulously fair into the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Aberrations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the legislation and order situation have been the topic of adverse comments from this Court along with from other courts Nonetheless they have failed to have any corrective effect on it.
These lists are sorted chronologically by Chief Justice and incorporate all notable cases decided via the court. Articles exist for almost all cases.
If that judgment goes to appeal, the appellate court will have the chance to review both the precedent and also the case under appeal, Maybe overruling the previous case law by setting a fresh precedent of higher authority. This may possibly transpire several times given that the case works its way through successive appeals. Lord Denning, first from the High Court of Justice, later with the Court of Appeal, provided a famous example of this evolutionary process in his improvement in the concept of estoppel starting within the High Trees case.
Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-225471 Tag:Coming to your main case, It's also a very well-set up proposition of regulation that when an inquiry is conducted on charges of misconduct by a public servant, the Court is check here 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 reach a finding of fact or conclusion. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of the fact or evidence during the Stricto-Sensu, use to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and summary obtain support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of your charge, however, that is subject on the procedure provided under the relevant rules instead of otherwise, for your reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not act as appellate authority to re-recognize the evidence and to reach at its independent findings over the evidence.