Pakistan Case Law
1990 SCMR 1240

KHADIM HUSSAIN and others vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1990 SCMR 1240
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Appeal No, 491 in Civil Petition No,325-R, Civil Miscellaneous Petitions
Date1989-10-29
Judge(s)Muhammad Haleem, CJ., Shafiur Rahman, Saad Saood Jan, Ali Hussain Qazilbash and Naimuddin
Authored byMuhammad Haleem
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition converted into an appeal by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, concerning a service dispute where the respondents conceded to the stand taken by the petitioners in a written application. Acting upon this concession, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order. Subsequently, third parties filed civil miscellaneous petitions seeking to be impleaded as parties, asserting that their rights would be adversely affected by the respondents' concession. The Court held that since these applicants were not parties in the proceedings before the Service Tribunal, they lacked the requisite locus standi to challenge the concession at this appellate stage. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions for impleadment were rejected, establishing the principle that third parties not involved in the original tribunal proceedings cannot intervene to challenge a concession made between the primary litigants before the apex court.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether third parties who were not litigants before the Service Tribunal have the locus standi to challenge a concession made by respondents in the Supreme Court?
  • Can a petition be converted into an appeal upon hearing the petitioner?
  • Are parties who lack locus standi entitled to be impleaded in a main petition or appeal?
service tribunallocus standiimpleadment of partiesconcession by respondentscivil miscellaneous petition

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.---Upon hearing the petitioner we convert this petition into an appeal, and allow it in terms of the concession by the counsel for the respondents in his written application that the respondents "have decided to concede to the stand taken by the petitioner." In view of this concession, the impugned order is set aside.

2. ' The petitioners in Civil Miscellaneous Petitions Nos.321-R of 1989, 322R of 1989 and in an unnumbered Civil Miscellaneous Petition, have prayed to be impleaded as parties in the main petition, as they contend that their right would be affected by the concession of the respondents.

3. Since they were not parties in the appeal before the Service Tribunal, they have no locus standi to challenge the concession at this stage. Accordingly, the petitions are rejected.

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