GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Primary and Secondary Healthcare Department, Lahore vs Dr

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

GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Primary and Secondary Healthcare Department, Lahore VS Dr. MUHAMMAD SHAHID HUSSAIN O. XXIV, R.1, O. XIII, R. 1 & O.I, R. 4---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 12---Punjab Service Tribunals (Procedure) Rules, 1975, R. 21---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 212(3) & 10-A---Petition under Article 212(3) of the Constitution, seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal---Filing of---Limitation---Impugned judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal included a specific direction for its office to send a copy of the order to the relevant departmental authority---However, it is important to note that this direction was given following Rule 21 of the Punjab Service Tribunals (Procedure) Rules, 1975 ("Rules, 1975"), which mandates that a copy of every order of final adjudication on an appeal must be provided by a Tribunal, free of costs, to the competent authority---This direction does not determine the period of limitation---To find out the period of limitation for filing a petition for leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution and how it is computed, one needs to consult the relevant law, which is the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 ("Rules, 1980")---Rule 1 of Order XXIV, read with Rule 1 of Order XIII of the Rules, 1980 prescribes a 60-days period for filing a petition for leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution---Furthermore, Rule 4 of Order I of the Rules, 1980, states that the computation of any particular number of days should be by the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1908 ("Act, 1908")---This means that Section 12 of the Act, 1908, which governs the computation method of the limitation period for filing a petition for leave to appeal in the Supreme Court, is applicable, inter alia, in service matters---Government of Punjab filed the petition in the present case on the 1st of September 2023, which was 158 days after the announcement of the judgment and 44 days after receipt of the certified copy of the judgment sent by the Tribunal---Based on these facts, the Law Officer unsuccessfully sought to argue that the period of 114 days (spent on receiving the said judgment by the Department) has to be deducted from 158 days as required by Section 12 of the Act, 1908 and as such, the appeal, which was filed after 44 days of the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment, was well within the prescribed time---Period for filing a petition for leave to appeal under Article 212(3) of the Constitution is computed from the date when the Tribunal's judgment is announced in the presence of the parties, not from the date of receiving the certified copy of the judgment---According to Section 12 of the Act, 1908, only the time taken to obtain a certified copy of the judgment appealed from can be deducted---Act, 1908, does not take into account the time it takes for the Tribunal to send a copy of the judgment, which is announced in the presence of the parties, to the Department---It is important to note that Rule 21 of the Rules, 1975 does not specify a time frame for the Tribunal to send a copy of the judgment to the relevant competent authority after announcing it---This means that the Tribunal can send the judgment to the Department after the deadline for applying for leave to appeal has passed---In this situation, allowing this time to be excluded in the computation of the limitation period would potentially give the Department/Competent Authority the ability to create uncertainty about the rights of Civil Servants that have been established by the Tribunal and have become final over time---This could be unwholesome and violate the fair trial rights guaranteed under Article 10-A of the Constitution---Therefore, the provisions of Rule 21 of the Rules, 1975 do not apply to the present case---Consequently, the petitioner cannot benefit from it, especially since the petitioner did not argue that the Tribunal did not announce the judgment in the presence of the parties---Another important aspect of the present matter that needs to be considered is that the Tribunal announced its judgment in the presence of the parties on the 27th of March, 2023---Department applied for a certified copy of the judgment on the 25th of August, 2023, and received it the same day---However, the petition for leave to appeal was filed on the 1st of September, 2023---Based on the timeline, it appears that the petition was filed after the allowable time limit, as it had become barred by time when the petitioner applied for the certified copy of the judgment---Application for condonation of delay was dismissed as lacking merit; consequently, the main petition also stood dismissed due to being filed after the prescribed time.

GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Primary and Secondary Healthcare Department, Lahore vs Dr — 2024 PLC(CS) 1483 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC