1999SCMR1117 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD YAR — Petitioner Versus REHMAT ALI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1999SCMR1117 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan and Muhammad Arif, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YAR — Petitioner Versus REHMAT ALI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999SCMR1117 (PLP)?
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 1999SCMR1117 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan and Muhammad Arif, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999SCMR1117 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD YAR — Petitioner Versus REHMAT ALI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hafiz Tariq Naseem, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Aslam Ch., Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Mehmoodul Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No. l /Caveator.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos.2 to 5
- Date of hearing: 10th July, 1998.
- 3. On query from the Bench, both Hafiz Tariq Nasim learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing in support of this petition and Mr. Mahmoodul Islam, learned Advocate on Record representing respondent No. l/caveator have informed us that the impugned case is fixed for hearing arguments on 12-8-1998. They have jointly requested for disposal of this petition with a direction to the Tribunal to resolve the controversy before it expeditiously. We also find that the ends of justice will adequately, be met if the case is heard and arguments concluded on the next date already fixed i.e. 12-8-1998 and judgment delivered not later than two days thereafter. Order accordingly.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 4-2-1998 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal at Lahore in Appeal No.445/97).
S. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212
Appeal before Service Tribunal
Joint request by parties for remand of case to Service Tribunal-- Appeal was fixed before Service Tribunal for hearing arguments and parties had jointly requested the Supreme Court that directions may be given to Service Tribunal to resolve controversy before the Tribunal expeditiously
Supreme Court observed that ends of justice would, adequately, be met if case was heard and arguments concluded on next date already fixed and judgment delivered -not later than two days thereafter.
Judgment & Decree
S. 4
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 212
Appeal before Service Tribunal
Joint request by parties for remand of case to Service Tribunal-- Appeal was fixed before Service Tribunal for hearing arguments and parties had jointly requested the Supreme Court that directions may be given to Service Tribunal to resolve controversy before the Tribunal expeditiously
Supreme Court observed that ends of justice would, adequately, be met if case was heard and arguments concluded on next date already fixed and judgment delivered -not later than two days thereafter. Hafiz Tariq Naseem, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Aslam Ch., Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Mehmoodul Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No. l /Caveator. Nemo for Respondents Nos.2 to 5 Date of hearing: 10th July, 1998. Leave to appeal is claimed against the order dated 4-2-1998 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal Lahore, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, in Appeal No. 1045 of 1997.
2. The matter before the Tribunal, admittedly, progressed further and after couple of hearings the same had to be postponed to 6-3-1997. On the last mentioned date the matter was postponed on 22-3-1997 and a direction for filing a report along parawise comments by the respondent-side was also made and the case was postponed to 6-5-1997.
3. On query from the Bench, both Hafiz Tariq Nasim learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing in support of this petition and Mr. Mahmoodul Islam, learned Advocate on Record representing respondent No. l/caveator have informed us that the impugned case is fixed for hearing arguments on 12-8-1998. They have jointly requested for disposal of this petition with a direction to the Tribunal to resolve the controversy before it expeditiously. We also find that the ends of justice will adequately, be met if the case is heard and arguments concluded on the next date already fixed i.e. 12-8-1998 and judgment delivered not later than two days thereafter. Order accordingly. H.B.T./M-245/S Order accordingly.