1980 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
KARIM BUX Versus GOVERNMENT OF SIND AND ANOTHER
| Citation | 1980 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Sind |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KARIM BUX Versus GOVERNMENT OF SIND AND ANOTHER |
| Primary Law | Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1980 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Sind Service Tribunals Act (XV of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1980 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Sind bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1980 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (KARIM BUX Versus GOVERNMENT OF SIND AND ANOTHER). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- However on 14‑4‑1979 his Advocate presented an application requesting for vacating the order which was passed on 15‑3‑1979 whereby the appeal was dismissed to restore the appeal. An affidavit was also filed along with this application. In this it was pleaded that he had consulted his Advocate who had advised him to withdraw the application which he had earlier made for withdrawing the appeal. So what he intended to say was the withdrawal of the application and not for the withdrawal of the appeal.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 4‑Appellant praying for withdrawal of appeal‑Application granted‑Appeal disposed of as withdrawn‑Application made one month thereafter to withdraw application for withdrawal of appeal Rejected.
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM RASOOL SHAIKH (CHAIRMAN).‑
This is an application dated 14‑4‑1979 to vacate order passed on 15th March 1979. The appellant filed an appeal under section 4 of the Sind Service Tribunals Act, 1973 in this Tribunal on 17‑1‑1979. However on 22nd January 1979 he presented an application to allow him to withdraw the appeal on the plea that be would like to persue correct and proper remedy after withdrawing the appeal. The application remained pending and the appeal was fixed on 15‑3‑1979. The appellant was absent and therefore, the appeal was dismissed in default. On the same day h., appeared ants made a request for the restoration of his appeal and simultaneously ht made a request to withdraw the appeal on the basis of the application dated 22‑1‑1979 referred to above. His prayer was granted. The appeal was restored and then was allowed to be withdrawn. So these proceedings were finally concluded. However on 14‑4‑1979 his Advocate presented an application requesting for vacating the order which was passed on 15‑3‑1979 whereby the appeal was dismissed to restore the appeal. An affidavit was also filed along with this application. In this it was pleaded that he had consulted his Advocate who had advised him to withdraw the application which he had earlier made for withdrawing the appeal. So what he intended to say was the withdrawal of the application and not for the withdrawal of the appeal. We have beard the appellant and we find no force in the plea which has been taken. It is clearly an afterthought. The order on 15‑3‑1979 withdrawing the appeal was passed in presence of the appellant at his own request. He clearly understood the order which was passed. It is pertinent to note that the present application to vacate the aforesaid order was made on 14‑4‑1979 i.e., after one month. In case the appellant had not understood the order whereby the appeal was disposed of on 15‑3‑1979 he would have immediately made the application either on the same day or within a few days and could not wait for one month. We are satisfied that the appellant has taken a false plea in the present application. In result the application is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.