Pakistan Case Law
2003 PLC (C.S.) 988

SECRETARY EDUCATION and others vs IJAZ HUSSAIN and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2003 PLC (C.S.) 988
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petitions Nos.226 to 231-L of 2002
Date2002-04-01
Judge(s)Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar
Authored byMunir A. Sheikh
ResultLeave refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a series of civil petitions filed by the Secretary Education and others against a consolidated judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the delay of 44 days in filing the petitions could be condoned based on the explanation that the file was being processed internally between various government departments to determine the necessity of filing an appeal. The Court held that the administrative movement of files between departments does not constitute a sufficient ground for condonation of delay. Consequently, the Court dismissed the applications for condonation of delay, resulting in the dismissal of the main petitions as time-barred. The judgment reaffirms the established legal principle that bureaucratic delay or the internal movement of files within government departments is not a valid or sufficient reason for condoning a delay in filing legal proceedings, emphasizing that parties must adhere to statutory limitation periods regardless of internal administrative processes.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the internal movement of files between government departments constitute sufficient cause for the condonation of delay in filing an appeal?
  • Can a petition be dismissed as time-barred if the application for condonation of delay is rejected?
condonation of delaylimitation periodservice tribunaltime-barredadministrative delay

' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---By this common judgment, we propose to decide Civil Petitions Nos.226 to 231-L of 2002 involving identical questions of law and facts.

2. These petitions are directed against the consolidated judgment dated 25-9-2001 of the Punjab Service Tribunal. Each petition is barred by 44 days. The only reason given in the application seeking condonation of delay was that the file continued moving from one department to another to determine whether the appeal should be filed or not. This ground has never been accepted as a sufficient ground for condonation of delay as per law declared by its Court in a number of cases.

3. Consequently the applications for condonation of delay are hereby dismissed, as a result of which the main petitions are also dismissed as barred by time and .

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