1985 PLP (2) (SCMR)
QADAR BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF PRISONS, PUNJAB and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Nasim Hasan Shah and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ |
| Parties | QADAR BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF PRISONS, PUNJAB and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | ---Art.185(3)--Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5--Limitation--Delay due to filing of incompetent review application not condoned--Exercise of jurisdiction on proper consideration of merits--No point of law of general importance being involved, leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court., Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: ---Art.185(3)--Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5--Limitation--Delay due to filing of incompetent review application not condoned--Exercise of jurisdiction on proper consideration of merits--No point of law of general importance being involved, leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court., Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Nasim Hasan Shah and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR) (QADAR BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF PRISONS, PUNJAB and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court (absent) and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th December, 1984.
- Ch. Mushtaq Masood, Advocate Supreme Court (absent) and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the Judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, dated 12-9-1983 in Case No.115/101 of 1983).
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment of Punjab Service Tribunal dated 12‑9‑1983; whereby petitioner's appeal from the order of his dismissal, was held as time -barred and dismissed accordingly. Learned counsel has contended that the time consumed in pursuing a review application (which further review admittedly was not competent) should have been condoned under section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Tribunal considered the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act and dismissed it on merits on the finding that there was no justification for filing the incompetent review application. That being so the delay was not condoned. It is a simple case of exercise of jurisdiction one way or the other on proper consideration of the merits. No point of law of general importance is involved. Leave to appeal is refused . M.I. Leave refused.