MUHAMMAD TA SNEEM vs CONTROLLER, B. I. S. E., SARGODHA
This review petition is directed against an order dismissing an application for restoration of a civil appeal which was earlier dismissed for non-prosecution. Learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that no legal grounds were made out for review of the court's order under the applicable rules, but highlighted the special facts and circumstances of the case and pointed to rules permitting the respondent Board to reduce punishments in cases of hardship even after original penalty orders have attained finality. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that despite the dismissal of the appeal and the restoration application, the respondent Board is not barred by the court's orders from exercising its independent power or discretion to reduce the punishment if such power legally exists under its rules. The court observed that the petitioner may approach the Board for this purpose, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.
- Does the dismissal of a civil appeal for non-prosecution bar a statutory board from exercising its independent power to reduce a punishment under its rules?
- Can an order of the Supreme Court dismissing an appeal and a restoration application act as a legal bar to the exercise of discretionary power vested in a board regarding hardship cases?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-This Review Petition is directed against the order, dated 14-5-1983 whereby an application for restoration of a civil appeal which was dismissed for non-prosecution, was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after some discussion candidly admitted that nothing can be urged in so far as the legal requirements for the review of an order passed by this Court are concerned. He has however after highlighting the facts and circumstances of the case which were the subject-matter of the civil appeal and its dismissal for non-prosecution which he said was unfortunate has pointed out that it was possible for this Court by virtue of its general powers under the rules, to take note of a redeeming feature; notwithstanding the dismissal of the appeal for non- prosecution and the failure of the application for restoration. He has in this behalf read the relevant rules whereunder the action was taken by the respondent Board against the petitioner, and has highlighted amongst others the rules which permit the Board in cases of hardship to reduce the punishment even after the original orders awarding the penalty, have attained finality.
3. ' We agree with the learned counsel that in the circumstances of this case notwithstanding the dismissal of petitioner's appeal for non-prosecution and the failure of his application for restoration, the Board can do so, if it is otherwise competent to reduce the punishment. The orders passed by this Court shall not be treated as a bar to the exercise of such power/ discretion provided of course it exists regarding which the learned counsel feels confident that it does exist.
4. Accordingly if so advised the learned counsel may move the respondent-Board in this behalf.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-caveator has not tried to contest this position and has raised any objection in this behalf.