Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

MAHBOOB-UR-RAHMAN versus GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN


Article 98 Right Petition Deleted For Default

1969 S C M R 143

Present : Fazle‑Akbar, C. J. and Abdus Sattar, J

MAHBOOB‑UR‑RAHMAN‑Petitioner

versus

GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN Respondent

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 216 of 1968, decided on 5th November 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 17th March 1968, in Writ Petition o. 1475 of 1966).

Constitution of Pakistan (1962)---

--

Art. 98‑Writ petition dismissed for default‑Second petition competent subject to question of laches.

Gul Muhammad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Tanvir Ahmed, Attorney for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 5th November 1968.

JUDGMENT

FAZLE‑AKBAR, C. J.

‑The petitioner was an Overseer in the Public Health Sub‑Division at Sargodha. After due show‑cause notice he was dismissed from service in 1959, and his representa tion against the said order was also rejected by the Authorities concerned. He then filed a second representation in October 1959, and in 1962 he was informed that nothing could be done to help him. Thereupon, he moved a writ in 1962 in the High Court against the order dismissing him from service. As the petitioner or his counsel failed to appear the said petition was dismissed for default on 16th November 1965, and the petition for restoration of the writ petition was also dismissed on 27th June 1966. On 6th August 1966, he filed a second writ petition against the order of dismissal which had been passed in 1959.

It is true that when a writ petition is dismissed for default, second writ petition is competent, but then there is every likelihood of his second writ petition being dismissed on ground of laches. In this case the order of dismissal was passed nearly eight years ago and, as such, the High Court rightly dismissed the petition on ground of laches. We, therefore, see no ground to interfere with the discretion of the High Court in this case.

This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
patent advocate from Muzaffargarh lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.