PROVINCE OF SINDH vs ABDUL TAWAB — 2026 PLD 113 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.

PROVINCE OF SINDH VS ABDUL TAWAB. Ss. 3 & 5---Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894), Ss. 4 & 34---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Time barred appeal---Condonation of delay, seeking of---Sufficient cause---Preferential treatment to government departments, autonomous bodies and private sector organizations, deprecation of---Time spent in fulfilling inter-departmental procedures and seeking final instructions from the competent authority, plea of---Validity---Appellant (Province of Sindh) was confronted as to the question of limitation for filing of the present appeal as same was barred by thirty days---Therefore, primary question before the Supreme Court was as to "whether the appellant / Province of Sindh could maintain its appeal against the enhancement of land acquisition compensation when the appeal itself was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period"---Held: Present civil appeal was barred by thirty days and the condonation application attached with the appeal did not specify any ground for indulgence of the Supreme Court except few unconvincing and generic grounds; for instance, after passing the impugned judgment, the appellant's representative approached the Office of Additional Advocate General, for obtaining certified copies of the impugned judgment and memo of appeal, thereafter, the office of the Additional Advocate General, moved an application for obtaining certified copies of the impugned judgment and memo of appeals, which were made ready and were delivered to the appellant, and then matter was assigned to the AOR---No explanation was offered as to why the matter was delayed and who was responsible for such delay---If the department was negligent or reckless and approached the A.A.G. Office with delay, then no premium of such delay could be accorded with the benefit of condonation in the lapse of time---The doctrine of equality before law demanded that all litigants, including the State, were accorded the same treatment and the law was administered in an even-handed manner---Carelessness, intentional or obvious sluggishness, or dearth of bona fide were no reason for condonation of delay---Findings of the High Court on merits were quite relevant, therefore, the present civil appeal was dismissed, on merits, as well as being time barred.

PROVINCE OF SINDH vs ABDUL TAWAB — 2026 PLD 113 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD