1988 PLP 1215 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL and another‑‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1215 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Javid Iqbal and Sand Snood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL and another‑‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1215 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1215 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Javid Iqbal and Sand Snood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1215 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL and another‑‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Shaukat Ali Saqib, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 20th April, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 13th October, 1980 in Writ Petition No.622 of 1978). Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ ‑‑‑Arts.185(3) & 199‑‑Leave to appeal, grant of‑‑Validity of appointment of High Court Judge, and order passed by him, impugned‑‑Petitioner challenging in writ jurisdiction order passed earlier in a writ petition‑‑Plea that appointment of High Court Judge who passed earlier order was not valid and constitutional petition was misconceived because the said Judge had resigned and order passed by him not having been challenged in appeal attained finality‑ No point of law having been raised, leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
JAVID IQBAL, J.‑‑This petition for leave to appeal has been filed by the petitioners and is directed. against the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 13th October, 1980. The background of this case is that previously the same petitioners had filed Writ Petition No.1413 of 1977 which was decided on 5th July, 1977 against the petitioners. Thereafter the petitioners filed a subsequent Writ Petition No.622 of 1978 challenging the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition on the ground that since the appointment of the learned Judge Malik Saeed Hassan, who passed that order, was not valid and constitutional, his order be ignored and that the grant of land in favour of the respondent be declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The order, dated 5th July, 1977 was never challenged in appeal by the petitioners. It therefore had attained finality. Then the contention about the validity of appointment of the learned Judge was also held to be misconceived as he had resigned. Furthermore Writ Petition No.622 of 1978 of the petitioners was dismissed in default as no one had appeared to prosecute this matter when it was called. However since the counsel had appeared at a later stage, the learned Judges of the Division Bench dismissed the petition even on merits. Learned counsel before us has not been able to raise any legal point involved in this case. In that view of the matter we do not find any substance in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. M.I./M‑439/S Petition dismissed.