MUHAMMAD SHARIF versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB
Articles 199 and 185 (3) of the High Court rejected the constitutional application for a lawyer's absence because the Advocate General's constitutional application for appointment of a lawyer was filed against the provincial government and the application was made due to the absence of a lawyer. It was excluded that due to the appointment of a lawyer as Advocate General, he could not appear against the provincial government. The appointment of a lawyer did not refuse to appear before the High Court and on behalf of the petitioners, To inform applicants of disability and / or legal notice that they are now required by court Bro will not be representing them, both options available to the lawyer were not benefited by the High Court.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
