Ch. MUHAMMAD ILYAS GUJJAR vs CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF PAKISTAN and others
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioner's writ petition. Upon examination, the Supreme Court of Pakistan noted that an Intra-Court Appeal (ICA) under Section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 was competent against the impugned judgment passed by a learned Single Bench of the High Court. While the petitioner's counsel expressed concern regarding the hurdle of limitation in filing an ICA, the Court observed that the petitioner had been actively pursuing the remedy. Consequently, the Supreme Court disposed of the petition with the observation that, subject to all just exceptions, the ICA bench seized of the matter may examine the question of limitation favourably in light of the circumstances. The core legal question addressed was the maintainability of a direct petition before the Supreme Court when an Intra-Court Appeal remedy was available before the High Court.
- Whether an Intra-Court Appeal is competent against a judgment passed by a Single Bench of the High Court under Section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972?
- How should the question of limitation be addressed when a party mistakenly pursues a remedy before the wrong forum?
- Section 3, Law Reforms Ordinance 1972
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C J.---This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 3rd March, 2010 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby writ petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.
2. As the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner has been decided by a learned Single Bench of the High Court, therefore, after taking facts from the learned counsel, we have asked him to satisfy the Court about maintainability of instant petition because, prima facie, we were of the opinion that against the impugned judgment ICA under section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 was competent before the High Court. In this view of the matter, learned counsel stated that question of limitation would be a hurdle in his way. However, it was pointed out to him that in Accountant General for Pakistan v. Zia Mohy-ud-Din (PLD 2008 SC 164), this Court has observed that the question of limitation shall be considered if the application for condonation of delay is filed, but as we have noted that petitioner has been pursuing his remedy, as is evident from the facts and circumstances, therefore, we are inclined to make an observation that subject to all just exceptions, ICA bench, seized with the matter, may examine the question of limitation, in filing of ICA by the petitioner, favourably.
3. Learned counsel appearing for Caveat has raised objection upon making of such observation by this Court but since, as it has been noted hereinabove, the petitioner has been pursuing his remedy before this Court as well as before the High. Court, therefore, by using the words 'subject to all just exceptions' we have allowed the respondent to raise question qua the limitation, but the Court will consider it, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, favourably.
Petition stands disposed of with the above observation.