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.
Review No.15 of 1980 in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.668 o1 1979, decided on 11th April, 1981.
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 31-7-79 in Intra-Court Appeal No.237 of 1979).
---Art.185 (3)--Leave to appeal--When leave to appeal is refused, order appealed against is kept intact--All observations made by Court are to be read and understood consistently with intactness of that order.
M. Ahmad Hasan Khan, Advocate Supreme Court with Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for 'Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 11th April, 1981.
The petitioner seeks review of order dated 3-11-79 and his petition is barred by 308 days for which he has an explanation that the order was passed in his absence.
2. His grievance is confined to the concluding para of the order passed while refusing leave to appeal to the opposite party.
3. The grievance is misconceived for when leave to appeal is refused, the order appealed against is kept intact, and all observations made are to be read and understood consistently with the intactness of that order. Given that background the observations, without being mad the sole basis of that decision, would mean that the grievance of the petitioner then seeking leave would arise not on the giving of the direction but when Government takes steps which adversely affect his terms and conditions and are not permissible under the law.
The review petition is, therefore, dismissed also as time-barred.
M-. Z . M . Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer