Miss SABIRA HUSSAIN vs CHAIRMAN, P.A.R.C. and others
This petition for leave to appeal challenged an order remitting a case back to the respondent-department. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the impugned order remitting the matter for further proceedings warranted interference by the Court at that specific stage. Upon reviewing the arguments and the record, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the order of remand, finding no sufficient grounds to do so. The Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, holding that the petitioner's rights remained protected. The key principle laid down is that where a case is remanded to a department for further consideration, the Court will generally not interfere at the interlocutory stage, provided that the petitioner retains the right to challenge any subsequent adverse order by raising all available legal and factual arguments at the appropriate time.
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with an order remitting a case to a department at an interlocutory stage?
- Does a petitioner have the right to raise all legal points against a future adverse order if a remand order is upheld?
ORDER
After hearing Raja Muhammad Asghar, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner and perusing the impugned order as well as other material available on record, we see no ground to interfere with the impugned order remitting the case to the respondent-department at this stage.
However, if, eventually, an adverse order is passed against the petitioner, she shall be at liberty to raise all the points available to her under the law including the points sought to be agitated during the course, of arguments of this petition.
2. With the above observation, the petition is dismissed and leave declined .