1984 PLP 64 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (ADMINISTRATION), PUNJAB AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1984 PLP 64 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (ADMINISTRATION), PUNJAB AND OTHERS-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP 64 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP 64 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP 64 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (ADMINISTRATION), PUNJAB AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Zafar Yasin, Advocate Supreme Court and Masud Akhtar, Advo cate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 29th October, 1980.
- Mian Zafar Yasin, Advocate Supreme Court and Masud Akhtar, Advo cate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21-7-1976 of the Service Tribunal Camp Lahore in Appeal No. 36 (L)/76). -- Art. 212 (3)-Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 12(3)-Limita tion-Filing copy of judgment of Service Tribunal with petition for leave to appeal neither obligatory nor necessary-Time taken in obtaining copy of such judgment, held, cannot be excluded.
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑This petition is barred by 106 days. In condonation of delay, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Service Tribunal had reserved the judgment after conclusion of the hearing which was announced in the absence of the parties on 21‑7‑1976 and a. coy of this Judgment was sent by a letter dated 9m9‑1976 to the petitioner but received on 14‑9‑1976. The petition for leave to appeal was Allowed is this Court on 28‑2‑1977, long after the expiry of 60 days; the time limited for filing such petitions after receipt of the copy of the judgment. In this connection, it is submitted that the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition in the High Court which was disposed of on 28‑7'‑1974. Some time was consumed in obtaining the copy of this judgment. However, the learned counsel frankly admitted that it was neither obligatory not necessary to file copy of this judgment and the petition for leave to appeal could be entertained by this Court without copy of the said judgment. In these circumstances, time taken for obtaining this copy of the High Court's judgment cannot be excluded. As no sufficient cause for condonation of delay has been made out, this petition must fail and is dismissed hereby. M. Z. M. Leave refused.