GUL TIAZ KHAN MARWAT vs THE REGISTRAR PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR — 2026 PLC(CS) 430 SUPREME-COURT

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

GUL TIAZ KHAN MARWAT VS THE REGISTRAR PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR. O. XXVI, R. 1---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 188---Peshawar High Court Ministerial Establishment (Appointment, Terms and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020, Rr. 16 & 20---Peshawar High Court Ministerial Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1989, R. 12---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1986, R. 3---West Pakistan (Civil Services) Delegation of Powers Rules, 1962, Appendix---Review petition---Reviewable ground(s)---Scope---Petitioner, who was an employee of Peshawar High Court, approached Supreme Court assailing dismissal of his constitution petition against his dismissal; which was also dismissed by the Supreme Court---Review was sought against said dismissal---Held: [Per Shakeel Ahmad, J.] The provisions of Rule 12 of the Peshawar High Court Ministerial Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1989 ('the 1989 Rules'), Rule 3 of the [Khyber Pakhtunkhwa] Civil Servants (Appeal) Rules, 1986 ('the Rules 1986'), the Appendix of the High Court of West Pakistan (Civil Services) Delegation of Powers Rules, 1960 ('the Rules 1960'), cumulatively stipulate that the right of appeal had been provided to the petitioner and such rules would mutatis mutandis apply to the petitioner's case, which was to be heard by a Bench of two judges to be nominated by the Chief Justice, as per the statement showing delegation of powers of the Gazetted and non-Gazetted establishment under the Rules 1960---However, in exercise of powers conferred under Article 208 of the Constitution, the Peshawar High Court with the approval of the Governor Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has made the Peshawar High Court Ministerial Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020 ('the Rules 2020'), and in terms of Rule 16 of the Rules 2020, if any order affecting the terms and conditions of service of a member of the establishment is passed or any penalty is imposed by legislation, an appeal shall lie to the Chief Justice; where any such order is passed or penalty imposed by the Chief Justice, other than an appeal from an order of the Registrar, an appeal shall lie to a Bench of three senior most judges of the Court---Furthermore, while the Rules 1989 stand repealed under Rule 22 of the Rules 2020, the Rules so repealed shall not affect anything duly done or suffered before these Rules---A reviewable ground would essentially be one where the decision is per incuriam or where error is so evident that it is floating on the surface of the record, having substantial impact on the final outcome of the case as happened in the instant case, thereby constituting a valid ground for review---[Per Shahid Bilal Hassan, J.] It is the responsibility of the Judges of this/Supreme Court to correct their errors, because the principles of law enunciated in their judgments are binding on all other courts in the country under Article 189 of the Constitution of Pakistan---Orders and judgments based on an erroneous assumption of material facts, or those made without adverting to a provision of law, or reflecting a departure from the undisputed construction of law and the Constitution, may amount to an error apparent on the face of the record and can be rectified---Article 188 of the Constitution of Pakistan creates the constitutional right to seek review of any judgment or order of the Supreme Court---The matter of review is attended to in the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 in Order XXVI and its rule (1) enunciates that the review may be filed on grounds similar to those mentioned in Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C., stipulates that a review may be filed if there is "some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or for any other sufficient reason"---In the present case, this (Supreme) Court while handing down the judgment under review did not ponder upon the peculiar facts of the case of the petitioner and prevalent law at the relevant time, which is an error apparent on record and a solid ground to review the judgment to the extent of the petitioner's case, as it goes to the root of the case---Additionally, when the judgment sought to be reviewed has been passed by departing the relevant law on the subject the question of limitation could be ignored and the wrong done and committed has to be corrected and reviewed by condoning delay, because the rules and procedure are framed and enacted for advancement of justice---Supreme Court set aside judgment-under-review to the extent of the petitioner as well as order passed by the High Court in constitution petition through which constitutional petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed and remanded the matter to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, to place the petitioner's appeal before the judges to be nominated by him for decision in accordance with law---Review petition was allowed accordingly.

GUL TIAZ KHAN MARWAT vs THE REGISTRAR PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, PESHAWAR — 2026 PLC(CS) 430 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLC