2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
MUHAMMAD AZAM JAVED Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Home Secretary, Lahore and another
| Citation | 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AZAM JAVED Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Home Secretary, Lahore and another |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (MUHAMMAD AZAM JAVED Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Home Secretary, Lahore and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 10th March, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 1-1-2002 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, passed upon Civil Miscellaneous No. 1347 of 2001 in Appeal No. 1939 of 2001).
S.4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212(3)
Dismissal of appeal for non-prosecution
Plea of civil servant seeking restoration of appeal was that he had to appear before Service Tribunal, therefore, he had restrained his lawyer from appearing on relevant date; and that civil servant could not appear as he was busy in his professional duties-- Service Tribunal refused to restore appeal
When civil servant, according to his own showing, was busy in his professional duties, then why he had restrained his lawyer from appearing before Service Tribunal
Tribunal had passed impugned order after considering all aspects of the case
No question of law of public importance was involved
Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused leave to appeal. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the order dated 1-1-2002 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), whereby his application for restoration of his Appeal dismissed by it earlier on 19-11-2001 on the ground of non-prosecution was rejected. Facts briefly are that the petitioner who was earlier working in the Federal Security Force and after its disbandment, joined Pakistan Rangers. Thereafter he was taken in the Punjab Constabulary. He filed an appeal before the Tribunal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, on 19-9-2001 claiming seniority for the service rendered by him in the Pakistan Rangers. The said appeal was dismissed for, want of prosecution on 19-11-2001 as nobody was present from his side. He filed an application for restoration of his appeal and put up the reason that he had to appear before the Tribunal personally as such he restrained his lawyer from appearance on the above date. He, however, could not appear personally as he was busy in his professional duties. This application came up for hearing on 1-1-2002 and the Tribunal after hearing the parties dismissed the same. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal. We have considered the contentions advanced by the petitioner who has appeared in person in support of his petition and have gone through the entire material placed on record. We fail to understand why the petitioner restrained his lawyer from appearance before the Tribunal when he, according to his own showing, was busy in his professional duties. The Tribunal, after taking into consideration all the aspects of the case, has dismissed his application for restoration of his appeal. We do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order. Even otherwise, no point of law of general public importance as envisaged under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is involved in the present case. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed and leave refused. S.A.K./M-897/S Leave refused.