MLD 2007

2007 PLP 1898 (MLD)

Malik MUSHAHID ALI — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY through Vice-Chancellor and 4 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2007-April-10
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP 1898 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties Malik MUSHAHID ALI — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY through Vice-Chancellor and 4 others — Respondents
Primary Law General Clauses Act (X of 1897)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1898 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: General Clauses Act (X of 1897) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1898 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1898 (MLD) (Malik MUSHAHID ALI — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY through Vice-Chancellor and 4 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

General Clauses Act (X of 1897)

Representation

  • Khurshid Ahmed Khan for Petitioner.
  • Malik Muhammad Tariq Rajwana for Respondent.
  • MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR ARSHAD, J.---It has been pointed out by learned counsel for respondent-University that against the impugned order, petitioner's appeal before the Vice-Chancellor is pending, whereas, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that said appeal is not being decided by the Vice-Chancellor, hence the petitioned was compelled to file the present writ petition..

Headnotes / Summary

S.24-A

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

Constitutional petition

Duty of public functionary

Contention of petitioner was that as appeal filed- against impugned order had not been decided by the Vice-Chancellor of the University, petitioner was compelled to file constitutional petition

Since it was the duty of every public functionary to decide/dispose of representation/appeal etc. within a reasonable time; and after application of independent mind by giving reasons, in terms of S.24-A of General Clauses Act, 1897, constitutional petition was disposed of by the High Court with the direction to the Vice-Chancellor to dispose of appeal of petitioner within one week.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR ARSHAD, J.

It has been pointed out by learned counsel for respondent-University that against the impugned order, petitioner's appeal before the Vice-Chancellor is pending, whereas, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that said appeal is not being decided by the Vice-Chancellor, hence the petitioned was compelled to file the present writ petition..

2. Be that as it may, since it is the duty of every public functionary to decide/dispose of the representation/appeal,' etc. within a reasonable time and after application of independent mind by giving reasons, in terms of section 24-A of General Clauses Act, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Vice-Chancellor to respondent-University to dispose of the appeal of the petitioner within one week from today. H.B.T./M-292/L Order accordingly.