1989 SCMR 1797 (PLP)
SHAH JAHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, N.‑W.F.P and 32 others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 SCMR 1797 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | SHAH JAHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, N.‑W.F.P and 32 others Respondents |
| Primary Law | North‑West Frontier Province Service Tribunals Act (I of 1974)‑ ‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 SCMR 1797 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: North‑West Frontier Province Service Tribunals Act (I of 1974)‑ ‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 SCMR 1797 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 SCMR 1797 (PLP) (SHAH JAHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, N.‑W.F.P and 32 others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. S. Siddiqui, Advocate and Manroor Elahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 14th May, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 8‑3‑1988 in Service Appeal No.144 of 1987 by Service Tribunal N.‑W.F.P. Peshawar). -‑‑S.4‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.212(3)‑‑Limitation‑‑Petitioner's appeal before Service Tribunal was time‑barred‑‑Examination of points on merits was not necessary‑‑Petition, held, merited dismissal on ground of limitation‑ Leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑A service appeal having been dismissed by N.‑W.F.P. Service Tribunal on grounds of limitation as well as on merits: leave to appeal has now been sought on both points. We, having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on question of limitation at some length, are satisfied that the petitioner's appeal before the Tribunal was time‑barred and it merited to be dismissed on this ground alone. There is no need to examine points on merits. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused. M.A.K./S‑305/S Leave refused.