JUDGMENT :

1. The appellant is the writ petitioner before this Court. Before the Writ Court, the appellant/writ petitioner has challenged the orders dated 04.11.2022 and 16.11.2022, whereby the request for engaging the legal practitioner to defend him in the disciplinary proceedings, was rejected.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are ranked in the Writ Court.

3. The appellant/writ petitioner was an employee, who was promoted to the post of Junior Assistant. He has been faced with grave charges, for which, an enquiry has been initiated and that he has no exposure to the Departmental Enquiry. He further submitted that as no other co-employee has come forward to assist him and that charge memo has been issued at the instance of the Vice Chancellor, the appellant/writ petitioner made a representation to the Enquiry Officer to enable him to permit assistance in the enquiry. The appellant/writ petitioner also made a representation to the disciplinary authority for the same. The request for availing the assistance of a legal practitioner, was ultimately rejected by the third respondent on the ground that in terms of sub-clause (8) of Rule 9 of the Ordinance