Raja TARIQ AZIZ vs AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR — 2026 PLC(CS) 132 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Citation: 2026 PLC(CS) 132 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year: 2026
Reporter: PLC
Parties: Raja TARIQ AZIZ vs AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Subject matter: Service
Provisions referred to: S. 4---; S. 4

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

Judgment text as reported

Raja TARIQ AZIZ VS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR. S. 4---appeal before the Service Tribunal, filing of---Limitation---appellant challenged, before the Service Tribunal, a notification vide which the respondent was granted time (notification-in-question), however, the same was dismissed being time-barred having been filed after a period of almost one and a half year---Validity---appellant in (relevant ground /para of) the memo of appeal before the Service Tribunal had furnished explanation regarding the delay in filing the appeal and stated that the notification-in-question was neither communicated to him nor the same was published in the official gazette---In support of his stance, he appended the certification issued by the Printing and Stationary Department along with the appeal---Moreover, the appellant also filed a separate application for condonation of delay accompanied by an affidavit---Under S. 4 of the azad Jammu and Kashmir Service Tribunals act, 1975, any civil servant aggrieved by any final order, whether original or appellate, made by a departmental authority, in respect of any of the terms and conditions of his service, may, within ninety days of the communication of such order to him or within six months of the establishment of the appropriate Tribunal, whichever is later, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal--- after perusal of ground (specifically taken in memo of appeal) and the certification issued by the Printing and Stationary Department, it appeared that the notification impugned before the Service Tribunal was neither communicated to the appellant nor the same was published in the official gazette, hence, the appeal filed by the appellant before the Service Tribunal was within limitation.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLC

2026 PLC(CS) 253 SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL-ISLAMABADMUHAMMAD SHABBIR VS REGISTRAR, ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT. Delegation of authority---Scope---Where the Constitution or the law does not itself pro…
2026 PLC(CS) 132 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRRaja TARIQ AZIZ VS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR. S. 4---appeal before the Service Tribunal, filing of---Locus standi---…
2026 PLC 107 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURTEMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFITS INSTITUTION, LAHORE VS MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Beneficial legislation---Scope---Social welfare and beneficial statutes m…
2026 PLC 107 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURTEMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFITS INSTITUTION, LAHORE VS MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Ss. 22(1)(b), 22a & Sched., Clause 1---Employees' old-age benefits---Roun…
2026 PLC 107 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURTEMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFITS INSTITUTION, LAHORE VS MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Preamble---Provisions of Employees' Old-Age Benefits Act, 1976 have been…
2026 PLC(CS) 138 PUNJAB SERVICE TRIBUNALASIF HUSSAIN CHANGAZI VS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MUZAFFARGARH CANAL CIRCLE, MULTAN S.2(1)(b)---Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Condi…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English