MUHAMMAD AMJAD versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (OPERATIONS), LAHORE
Article 212 (3) of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), Section 4 was delayed in obtaining a copy of the order passed by the authorities at the time of compulsory retirement, which was the reason for filing the appeal beyond the limitation period. That such a case is not enough. As for the delayed waiver, as the delay was to be explained every day, the petition filed by the applicant was decided by the competent authority on 24 12 2004, while the appeal was filed on 29 11 2006 before the service tribunal. Therefore, the service appeal was withheld by the time service. The tribunal considered the evidence along with the merits as well as the limitation approach, which was decided by the service tribunal, which was based on the proper definition of the material available on the record, and could be used by any court to justify interference by the Supreme Court. The type of vulnerability and illegal action was not disclosed. Article 212 (3) of the Constitution included public importance included in leave of appeal.
