a.

That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
b. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
c. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
d. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
e. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
f. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
g. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
h. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
i. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
j. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
k. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
l. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
m. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
n. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
o. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
p. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
q. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
r. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
s. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
t. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
u. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
v. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
w. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
x. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
y. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
z. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
aa. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.
bb. That it reflects from the charges that various factual controversies are
involved which is matter of inquiry and cannot be resolved without holding
a regular and full-fledged inquiry but the authority did not conduct any
regular inquiry without assigning any reasons. Reliance is placed on 2007
SCMR 192 and 2006 SCMR 846.
cc. That no show cause notice was ever served upon the appellant which is
sheer and clear violation of principle of natural justice as guaranteed by the
Article 10 of the Constitution 1973 of the country. It is also violation of
principle of Audi alterem Partem, therefore, the impugned order is not
sustainable in the eye of law.
dd. That the impugned order is exparte and without giving any opportunity of
hearing to the appellant. He has been condemned unheard.