Haji MALIK AMAN vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LANDS) PESHAWAR AND 3
The petitioner filed a petition before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which was found to be barred by time by thirty-six days. The judgment challenged was delivered on 7-6-1974, and the petition was filed on 2-10-1974. The petitioner sought condonation of the delay, arguing under the impression that limitation periods did not run during the long vacation of the Court. The Supreme Court rejected this plea, holding that the practice of the Court, as established under the Supreme Court Rules, allows for the filing of petitions and proceedings during the vacation on all working days (excluding Saturdays). The Court found no ambiguity regarding this rule and concluded that the petitioner's misunderstanding did not constitute a bona fide excuse for the delay. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition on the ground of limitation, reaffirming that ignorance of the Court's established practice regarding filing during vacations does not justify condonation of delay.
- Does the limitation period for filing petitions in the Supreme Court of Pakistan cease to run during the Court's long vacation?
- Are petitions and other proceedings received by the Supreme Court of Pakistan during the long vacation?
- Does a mistaken belief that limitation does not run during the Court's vacation constitute a bona fide excuse for condonation of delay?
- Order II Rule 3, Supreme Court Rules 1956
ORDER
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-This petition is barred by time. Judgment was delivered on 7-6-1974.
Application for supply of copy was made on 17-6-1974. It was made ready for delivery on 9.7-1974, though delivery was tactually obtained on 13-7-1974. The petition was filed in this Court on 2-10- 1974 and thus was out of time by thirty-six days.
2. In excuse for the delay, it is submitted that the petitioner was under the impression that limitation did not run during the long Vacation of the Court. Accordingly the petition was filed immediately on the reopening of the Court. In these circumstances it was prayed that the delay be condoned.
3. There is no merit in this plea. The practice of this Court, as laid down in Order II, rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules and Orders is than petitions and other proceeding are received by the Supreme Court during the Vacation on all working days (except Saturdays). No ambiguity existed on this point and there could be no scope for a contrary impression. Hence no bona fide excuse for condonation of delay exists. The same view, in some what similar circumstances, was taken by this Court is Mushtaq Ahmad v. Vice-Chancellor. University of the Punjab, Lahore (1970 SCMR 26).
4. This petition is accordingly dismissed on the ground of limitation. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.