Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 4710 = 2026 SLD 4710 = 2026 PLJ 301
Supreme Appellate Court, Pakistan
C.P.L.A. No. 4430 of 2025
Presented By: Mrs. Ayesha A. Malik and Shakeel Ahmad JUDGES
Mr. Munawar Iqbal Duggal, Additional Attorney-General for Pakistan along with Khalid Zia S.O(L) for Petitioner. N.R for
Respondents. Date of hearing: 12.2.2026.

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Finance, Finance Division, Islamabad--Petitioner

VERSUS

FARID ULLAH and others--Respondents

Law: Civil Servants Act, 1973

Section:

Supreme Court Rules, 2025-- ----O. XXV r/w O.XIV R.1--Civil Servants Act, 1973 (LXXI of 1973)--Time barred petition--Petition filed before us is barred by 20 days--CPLA Committee could not be convened due to insufficient number of cases--Where delay was explained by reference to administrative routine rather than unavoidable circumstances, it indicated that compliance was depended on convenience rather than discipline--This kind of delay was inexcusable particularly when no effort had been made to reform or improve procedure that causes so much delay--Prescribed timeline as per Supreme Court Rules is 60 days--When a statutory timeframe was prescribed, it is intended to ensure that parties act with diligence and that disputes did not remain indefinitely open--CMA for condonation of delay is dismissed with result that Civil Petition is dismissed being barred by time. [Pp. 301, 302, 303 & 304] A, B, C, D, E Mr. Munawar Iqbal Duggal, Additional Attorney-General for Pakistan along with Khalid Zia S.O(L) for Petitioner. N.R for Respondents. Date of hearing: 12.2.2026. Order Mrs. Ayesha A. Malik, J.--The Petitioner, being the Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Finance Division, Pakistan Secretariate, Islamabad has impugned the judgment of the Service Tribunal dated 26.06.2025. However, we note that the Petition filed before us is barred by 20 days for which an application for condonation of delay has been filed. 2.       We have examined the application for condonation of delay. In terms of the said application, the case was under process with the Deputy Secretary (Litigation-II), Ministry of Finance in order to seek approval from the CPLA Committee. On obtaining this approval, it transpires that the CPLA Committee could not be convened due to insufficient number of cases before it for deliberation. Apparently when the number of cases increased the matter was approved by the CPLA Committee after which the draft was sent to the Law & Justice Division for vetting. This Division considered the draft, suggested some changes which ultimately was prepared, approved and ready for filing. At this point as per the contents of the…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register