Pakistan Case Law
1990 SCMR 1471

ABDUL QAYYUM, EXTELEPHONE OPERATOR vs THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, TELEGRAPHS, SARGODHA DIVISION, SARGODHA and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1990 SCMR 1471
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,706 of 1985
Date1989-05-23
Judge(s)Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan
Authored byGhulam Mujaddid
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal was filed by an ex-telephone operator challenging the dismissal of his service appeal by the Federal Service Tribunal. The primary legal issue before the Supreme Court was whether the petitioner could overcome the threshold bar of limitation, as the Tribunal had dismissed his appeal on the ground of being time-barred. During the proceedings, the Court directed the petitioner to address the issue of limitation first, emphasizing that the merits of the case could not be examined unless the procedural obstacle of limitation was successfully crossed. The petitioner appeared in person and failed to provide any satisfactory explanation or justification for the delay in filing his appeal. Consequently, the Court held that in the absence of a valid explanation for the delay, the petition could not be entertained. The Court affirmed that procedural requirements, specifically those regarding limitation, must be satisfied before a court can adjudicate upon the merits of a service-related grievance. Finding no grounds to condone the delay, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a court adjudicate the merits of a case if the appeal is barred by limitation?
  • Is a petitioner required to explain a delay in filing an appeal before the merits are considered?
limitationservice appealFederal Service Tribunaltime-barredprocedural delay

ORDER

1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.---The petitioner appeared in person. He argued his own case. He started with the merits of his case. We called upon him to first satisfy us on the question of limitation as the Federal Service Tribunal had dismissed his appeal on that ground. He was further told that unless and until he crossed the obstacle of limitation, it was not possible for him as well as for us to go into the merits of the case.

2. The petitioner was unable to give any satisfactory explanation for the delay.

3. ' We have no option but to dismiss this petition.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.