' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, ACTG. C.J.--Listed petitions have been filed against the judgments dated 22nd June, .2004. Concluding para. Therefrom is reproduced hereinbelow:-- "Abdul Rashid Advocate, learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation, in some appeals, has submitted that these appeals are time-barred. His objection is not correct. All appeals were filed in time. But even in time barred appeals benefit of the judgment of the Tribunal has to be extended to those employees also who have not filed appeals. The objection is overruled."
2. Petitions are barred by time. Applications have been moved separately for condonation of delay mainly on the ground that the petitioners were informed later on about the judgment as such they approached the Court with the delay of 2/3 days in each case.
3. It may be noted that plea taken by them is not acceptable because the arguments were advanced and judgment was announced on 22nd June, 2004 in presence of parties and their respective counsel. However, in one of the petition i,e, 2912-L of 2004 petitioner has taken plea that as he was mentally disturbed and under high tension because of family circumstances, therefore, he could not approach the Court within time.
' We are of the opinion that grounds taken in all petitions are not available. Besides it, learned counsel for caveat informed that in pursuance of impugned order petitioners were reinstated on 28th June, 2004 and presently they are facing proceedings under the Removal from Services (Special Power) Ordinance, 2000. Be that as it may, no plausible reason has been assigned for condonation of delay, therefore, instant petitions are dismissed accordingly.