Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Barrister MASROOR SHAH VS Respondent: N.-W.F.P. BAR COUNCIL and another
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Abdul Hameed Dogar, Ejaz Yousaf, Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan Title: Barrister MASROOR SHAH vs N.-W.F.P. BAR COUNCIL and another Case No.: Civil Petition No,582 of 2007 Date of Judgment:2008-04-24 Reported As: PLD 2008 Supreme Court 575 Result: Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT ' IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J.---Through instant petition, Barrister Masroor Shah, petitioner, seeks leave to appeal against judgment dated 10-4-2007 passed by learned Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, dismissing Writ Petition No, 490 of 2007 filed by the petitioner under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. 2. The petitioner applied to respondent No,1 i,e, N.-W.F.P. Bar Council, Peshawar, through its Secretary, for grant of licence to appear, act and plead as an Advocate to lower Courts, which was granted on 30-6-2001. The petitioner on 2-7-2001 submitted an application to respondent No,1, claiming exemption from condition of two years practice before the lower Courts in order to qualify for the grant of licence to appear, act and plead as an Advocate of the High Court, under section 27(c) of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The application was forwarded to the Administration Committee of the Peshawar High Court, where it remained pending adjudication for more than one and a half years. Ultimately, the exemption sought was granted and licence to practice law before the High Court was issued on 8-2-2003. The grievance of the petitioner in nutshell is, that by reason of inordinate delay caused by the respondents in adjudicating upon the petitioner's application under section 27(c) of the Act within the statutory period of six months as enunciated by law, the rights of the petitioner have been materially prejudiced. 3. We agree with the petitioner that by reason of an inordinate delay caused by the respondents in adjudicating upon the petitioner's application within the statutory period of six months as enunciated by Rule 5.7 of the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council and Legal Practitioners Rules, 1996, the
---
## Page 2
petitioner's seniority in the legal profession has been adversely A affected with any fault on his part. The delay is not attributable to the petitioner. 4. In view of the above, while converting the petitioner into appeal, we allow the same and set aside the impugned judgment dated 10-4-2007 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar.