Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1339 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR SOHAIL vs GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAK

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1339 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR SOHAIL VS GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA O.VII, R.11 & O.XXII, Rr. 1, 2---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Withdrawal simpliciter---Bar to institute a fresh one---Scope---It is the bounden duty of the Court to reject the plaint if it is liable to be rejected including, most particularly, being barred by law under O.VII, R.11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908---In the present case the petitioner did not withdraw his earlier constitutional petition with permission to bring a fresh one---Petitioner was precluded from instituting the present/fresh petition in respect of the same subject matter; thus, present petition filed by the petitioner was not maintainable---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1339 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR SOHAIL VS GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA S.12 & O.XXIII, Rr. 1, 2---Suit, withdrawal of---Permission of the Court, seeking of or otherwise---Powers of the Court---Scope---Fresh suit, filing of---Conditions---Firstly, if a request for permission to file a fresh suit is accompanied with a request for withdrawal or abandonment of claim or a part thereof, the Court has authority either to decline such request or allow the permission---Secondly, in the event of refusal, the dismissal simpliciter should not be ordered, but the request for permission alone should be declined, which would mean that the suit shall continue---Thirdly and more importantly, it would be problematic if the request is not declined in express and clear words , yet the suit is 'dismissed as withdrawn' without recording any reason---Such an order would be bad for being silent on giving reasons and would be more amenable to be put at naught if assailed; though would become final if not challenged---Fourthly and finally, for the sake of safe administration of justice, in regard to such an order it would be deemed and implied that the Court has found it fit for permission to file a fresh suit---There must be a request for permission to bring a fresh suit; in other words , where no such request was made, the withdrawal would be simpliciter alone, with no room for implied permission---In the present case, the petitioner did not withdraw his constitutional petition with permission to bring a fresh one---Petitioner was precluded from instituting the (present) fresh petition in respect of the same subject matter (appointment as a school teacher); thus, present petition filed by the petitioner was not maintainable---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1339 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR SOHAIL VS GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA S. 3---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.12 & O.XXIII, Rr.1, 2---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Withdrawal simpliciter---Bar to institute a fresh one---Scope---Petitioner (candidate) earlier filed constitution petition for his alleged right of appointment as Primary School Teacher (PST) under Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Appointment, Deputation, Posting and Transfer of Teachers, Lecturers, Instructors and Doctors) Regulatory Act, 2011, ('the Act 2011')---Petitioner withdrew earlier instituted constitutional petition which was dismissed---Later on the same subject-matter, the petitioner invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court again---Contention of the petitioner was that he had withdrawn earlier constitutional petition upon assurance of the respondents (authorities) to redress his grievance, but as they did not comply with their commitment, hence second (present) constitutional petition was being filed---Validity---Petitioner had disclosed his contention/fact in the contents of present petition, however, the relevant order of withdrawal did not support his contention as the same (order) showed that the (earlier) petition had been dismissed being not pressed after request for withdrawal under the instructions of client (petitioner)---Constitutional petition was procedurally governed under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ('C.P.C., 1908'), thus provisions regarding withdrawal simpliciter and bar on institution of fresh suit under S.12 and O.XXIII of the C.P.C., 1908, were relevant in the present case---Words "Dismissed as withdrawn " were used by the Court in the said withdrawal order---Court would emphasize that there must be a request for permission to bring a fresh suit; in other words, where no such request was made the withdrawal would be simpliciter alone with no room for implied permission, whereas in the present case the petitioner did not withdraw his earlier constitutional petition with permission to bring a fresh one---Petitioner was precluded from instituting the present/fresh petition in respect of the same subject matter (appointment as a PST); thus, present petition filed by the petitioner was not maintainable---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 PLC(CS) 1339 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR SOHAIL vs GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA O — 2023 PLC(CS) 1339 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLC