Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Writ Petition No. 8586 of 1980, decided on 17th May, 1981.
Art. 199‑Writ jurisdiction‑Petitioners signing neither writ petition nor power of attorney in favour of counsel‑Petition, held, un authorisedand incompetent.
Khawaja Tariq Rahim for Petitioners.
Khalid Mahmood Pasha for Respondent No. 1.
Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
Date of hearing : 17th May,,1981.
The respondent No. 1 filed C. M. 2/81 in the afore‑titled writ petition saying that "there is no valid writ petition before this honourable Court as the petition as well as the power of attorney is not signed by the petitioners or any person duly authorized by them." It was prayed that the stay order maybe withdrawn. It was directed that this should come up with the main case. Respondent No. 1 filed C. M. 3/81 in which the prayer was reiterated with the submission that the writ petition was not valid and deserved summary dismissal as the same had not been filed by any authorized person. Notice of this application was given to the learned counsel for the writ petitioners. The case has come up for hearing today.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has been shown the petition and the power‑of‑attorney filed by him. The petition is not signed by the writ petitioners. The power of attorney has also not been signed by the writ petitioners in favour of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Since the petition has not been signed by the petitioners nor, the petitioners have executed the power of attorney in favour of the learned counsel who filed the writ petition, the petition is obviously not authorized and is incompetent. This being so, it is dismissed but without any order as to costs in the circumstances.
M. Y. H. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer