2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, KARACHI and another Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE SIDDIQUI
| Citation | 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Nazirn Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ |
| Parties | CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, KARACHI and another Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE SIDDIQUI |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nazirn Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, KARACHI and another Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE SIDDIQUI). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Suleman Habibullah Addl. A.G Sindh and Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui, Advocate‑on‑Record for petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
Judgment & Decree
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, J‑‑‑The petitioners have impugned the judgment dated 4‑10‑2001 of learned Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi whereby the Appeal No.165‑2000 preferred by respondent, Muhammad Rafique Siddiqui, was allowed.
2. Admittedly, the petition is time‑barred by 38 days. The condonation of delay is sought on the ground that instructions from the concerned authority for filing appeal were not received in time and for that reason the petition could not be filed within time. It is settled law that on question of limitation the Government could not be treated differently from ordinary litigant. Completion of formalities is not a sufficient ground for condoning such delay. On above point, reference can be made to the cases reported as (1) Federation of Pakistan v. Jamaluddin and others (1996 SCMR 727), (2) Central Board of Revenue, v. Raja Industries (1998 SCMR 307) and (3) Pakistan Coast Guards v. Shareef Ahmed (2000 SCJ 586).
3. Since delay has not been explained satisfactorily, the leave to appeal is refused and the petition is dismissed. S.A.K./C‑91/S Leave Refused.