Ghulam Jillani Deceased Through Legal Heirs vs Province Of Punjab Etc.
This matter originated as a petition filed in the year 2000, which remained pending before the Supreme Court of Pakistan for several years. Throughout the proceedings, the case saw minimal progress, characterized primarily by repeated adjournments requested by the petitioners' counsel. When the matter came up for hearing, the petitioners' counsel again sought an adjournment. The Court observed that, given the significant passage of time and the lack of substantive activity, no live controversy subsisted between the parties, rendering the petition effectively infructuous. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition on the basis that it had become infructuous due to the lack of prosecution and the absence of a live issue. However, in the interest of justice, the Court granted the petitioners liberty to seek the revival of the petition through a miscellaneous application should they demonstrate that a valid cause of action still exists and requires adjudication. This order emphasizes the Court's stance against the indefinite pendency of inactive litigation.
- Can a petition be disposed of as infructuous if no live case subsists?
- Is a petitioner entitled to revive a petition disposed of as infructuous upon showing a valid cause?
ORDER In this petition which was filed in the year 2000 nothing has been done except granting adjournments on the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners. Even today the learned counsel is requesting for an adjournment.
2. In our view, no live case subsists in this matter and this petition thus appears to have become infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of. We shall, however, permit the petitioners to have this petition revived through a miscellaneous application still have a cause to agitate.