| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 4286 2024 PLJ 505 , 2024 SLD 4286 |
Appellate Jurisdiction
C.A. No. 795-L of 2012, C.A. No. 123-L of 2013 & C.P. No. 2508-L of 2017, decided on 15.4.2024.
Present: Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Mrs. Ayesha A. Malik and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ.
Mr. Tehmina Yasmeen
Respondent No. 1 (in person). Mr. Sanaullah Zahid, Additional Advocate General Punjab with Muhammad Shahid Rana, Director (S.W.) Rawalpindi for
Respondents No. 2-4
C.A. No. 795-L of 2012, C.A. No. 123-L of 2013 & C.P. No. 2508-L of 2017, decided on 15.4.2024.
Present: Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Mrs. Ayesha A. Malik and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ.
Mr. Tehmina Yasmeen
Respondent No. 1 (in person). Mr. Sanaullah Zahid, Additional Advocate General Punjab with Muhammad Shahid Rana, Director (S.W.) Rawalpindi for
Respondents No. 2-4
Raja TANVEER SAFDAR--Petitioner
VERSUS
Mrs. TEHMINA YASMEEN and others--Respondents
Law: Punjab Cooperative Bank Limited Staff Service Rules, 2010--
Section: 2, 40
Punjab Board of Revenue Act, 1957 (XI of 1957)-- ----S. 8--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Arts. 185(3) & 199--Application for demarcation--Report of Gardawar--Encroachments by petitioners--Appeal--Dismissed--Scope of remedy--Review petition--Dismissed--Remedy of review--Writ petition--Dismissed--Edequate and efficacious remedy--Challenge to--High Court, without adverting to grounds expressly taken by petitioners in their petition, concluded that remedy by way of review provided under Section 8 of Act of 1957 was adequate and efficacious for purposes of entertaining petition under Article 199 of Constitution--The scope of review jurisdiction under Section 8 of Act of 1957 is, therefore, restricted to grounds expressly prescribed by legislature--The High Court, without adverting to grounds taken by petitioners, had dismissed petition solely on ground that remedy of review under Act of 1957 was adequate--That conclusion, without examining grounds taken by petitioners, was not sustainable--If High Court, after examining grounds taken by petitioners and facts and circumstances of case was satisfied that they were covered within scope of remedy expressly provided under Act of 1957 then it would had been justified in deciding question of maintainability of petition under Article 199 of Constitution--Appeal allowed. [Pp. 614, 615 & 616] A, D & E Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--Constitutional jurisdiction--When law provides an adequate remedy, constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 will ordinarily only be exercised in exceptional circumstances--The exceptional circumstances which may justify exercising jurisdiction when an adequate remedy is available are when order or action assailed before High Court is palpably without jurisdiction, manifestly mala fide, void or corum non judice. [P. 614] B Punjab Board of Revenue Act, 1957 (XI of 1957)-- ----S. 8(1)--Scope of--Power of review-- The three grounds expressly stated in Section 8(1) of Act of 1957 are:(i) discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after exercise of due diligence, was not within knowledge or could not be produced by person seeking review at time when decree was passed…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492