DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER, SUKKUR versus KHAN MUHAMMAD
Section 115 (1) and AXLI, R1 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5 Appeal Court's decision and the review petition before the High Court against the order, delaying the application for delay of more than 30 days and Decree 13 was approved 5 Certified copy of the decision in 2010 was implemented on 5 2010 and 7 720 was given. A certified copy of the order was applied on 23 8 2010 and given on 24 8 2010, in which 14 9 2010 applicants were requested to state that they are the government. Officers were busy with flood prevention. The appeal of the justification will lie against the order and the appellate court's decision and the request for revision against the order must be accompanied by a copy of the decree when the applicant filed a certified copy of the appellate order on 23 8 2010 Had applied for. Subsequently, 90 days were set for filing a revision application which had already expired on 13 8 2010. c Workers will not be entitled to preferential treatment, but will be treated on the basis of equality with a common law claimant The applicants did not disclose in the affidavit that any of them was engaged in rescue work, in the affected areas. And when the relief work began and ended. The applicant failed to explain such delay by giving any reasonable and legal basis. The High Court dismissed the request for review in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
