DEPUTY POST MASTER GENERAL, REGION-III, POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, HYDERABAD and others vs MUHAMMAD JAVAID
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Deputy Post Master General against a judgment of the Federal Service Tribunal, which had set aside the dismissal of the respondent and ordered his reinstatement with back benefits. The primary legal questions before the Supreme Court were whether the delay in filing the petition could be condoned under the Limitation Act, 1908, and whether the case involved a substantial question of law of public importance as required for leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Upon review, the Court determined that the petitioners failed to demonstrate 'sufficient cause' to justify the two-day delay in filing. Furthermore, the Court held that the petition did not raise any question of law of public importance necessary to invoke its appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition on the grounds of being time-barred and lacking merit, thereby declining to grant leave to appeal. The judgment reinforces the strict application of limitation periods and the necessity of demonstrating a significant public legal issue for Supreme Court intervention in service matters.
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be entertained if it is filed beyond the prescribed limitation period without sufficient cause?
- Does a service matter involving reinstatement necessarily constitute a question of law of public importance under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
- What constitutes sufficient cause for the condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1908?
- Section 5, Limitation Act 1908
- Order XXXIII, Supreme Court Rules 1980
- Article 212(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
ORDER
' MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J.--- Deputy Post Master General, Region-III, Post Office Department, Hyderabad and others petitioners, seek leave to appeal against judgment dated 12-1-2008, whereby the learned Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi (Tribunal) accepted respondent's appeal, set aside the dismissal order and directed reinstatement of the respondent in service with all back- benefits.
2. We have heard the learned Deputy Attorney-General for a considerable length and examined the available record. It has been reported by the Office that the petition is barred by time by two days, for which the petitioners have filed an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Order XXXIII of Supreme Court Rules, 1980, for condonation of delay. Upon examination of the contents of the said application, we do not find any "sufficient cause" within the parameters of law to condone the delay, thus we are not persuaded to condone the reported delay.
3. Additionally, after having heard the learned Deputy Attorney General, we are of the firm view that no question of law of public importance within the contemplation of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, is involved in this case. No case for the grant of leave to appeal is made out.
4. In view of the above, the present petition is barred by time and devoid of merits as well, thus stands dismissed on both the counts. Leave is declined.