MUHAMMAD AZAM JAVED vs GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Home Secretary, Lahore and another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which had refused to restore the petitioner's service appeal after it was dismissed for non-prosecution. The petitioner, a former member of the Federal Security Force and Pakistan Rangers, had filed an appeal before the Tribunal claiming seniority for his past service. When the appeal was dismissed due to the absence of his legal counsel, the petitioner sought restoration, arguing that he had instructed his lawyer not to appear because he intended to appear personally, but was ultimately unable to do so due to professional duties. The Supreme Court examined the circumstances and found no justification to interfere with the Tribunal's discretionary order. The Court held that the petitioner's decision to restrain his counsel while being unable to attend personally did not constitute sufficient grounds for restoration. Furthermore, the Court determined that the case did not involve any point of law of general public importance as required for the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under the Constitution.
- Does the dismissal of a service appeal for non-prosecution due to the petitioner's own failure to ensure representation constitute a point of law of general public importance?
- Can a petitioner seek restoration of an appeal dismissed for non-prosecution after intentionally restraining their counsel from appearing?
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court interfere with a Service Tribunal's order refusing to restore an appeal?
- Section 4, Punjab Service Tribunals Act 1974
- Article 212(3), Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. ' TANIVR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the order dated 1-1-2002 of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), whereby his application for restoration of his Appeal dismissed by it earlier on 19-11-2001 on the ground of non-presecution was rejected.
2. ' Facts briefly are that the petitioner who was earlier working in the Federal Security Force and after its disbandment, joined Pakistan Rangers. Thereafter he was taken in the Punjab Constabulary. He filed an appeal before the Tribunal under section 4 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974, on 19- 9-2001 claiming seniority for the service rendered by him in the Pakistan Rangers. The said appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution on 19-11-2001 as nobody was present from his side. He filed an application for restoration of his appeal and put up the reason that he had to appear before the Tribunal personally as such he restrained his lawyer from appearance on the above date. He, however, could not appear personally as he was busy in his professional duties. This application came up for hearing on 1-1-2002 and the Tribunal after hearing the parties dismissed the same.
3. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
4. ' We have considered the contentions advanced by the petitioner who has appeared in person in support of his petition and have gone through the entire material placed on record. We fail to understand why the petitioner restrained his lawyer from appearance before the Tribunal when he, according to his own showing, was busy in his professional duties. The-Tribunal, after taking into consideration all the aspects of the case, has dismissed his application for restoration of his appeal. We do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order. Even otherwise, no point of law of general public importance as envisaged under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is involved in the present case.
5. ' Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed and .