Section 6 (3) A writ petition before the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Section 44 High Court Laches, applies to every order passed by the Member Board of Revenue of the party's influence required. The order will be considered. If the Board of Revenue was challenged, the Board of Revenue was a necessary party to be applied to the line of respondents, a written request could not be retained without alignment in the Board of Revenue because the respondents' line The parties used to write the petition. One year and ten months from the date of the first order, and five months after the date of the second order, my delay in dismissing the writ petition could not have been grounded, but the unknown delay in the jurisdiction of the writ was always fatal. Was considered. Be careful not to follow your case and after a delay of five months, a writ petition was filed which could have attracted the view of the deceased. A delay of five months was therefore not feasible on a bribery basis. According to the law, the impeachment order was approved and in the jurisdiction of the Board of Revenue, if one application for division is processed and another application is pending. Then there is the possibility that a contradictory decision / order can be approved, which in turn can lead to a deadlock. The order approved by the Board of Revenue was not a final order and was legally approved which was not open to challenge the legal question which was not raised. Before the lower courts could not be taken to the Supreme Court if it appealed or summarized the statement.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2015
