' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The petitioners were all civil servants who were retired from service under section 13(2) of the Balochistan Civil Servants Act in spite of having good record of service. Their Review Petition did hot yield any result for them. Two of them moved the Service Tribunal in the matter but by decisions given in 1981, the appeals were held to be incompetent in view of the prohibition imposed by the Provisional Constitution Order, 1981. They did not thereafter seek further relief till the decision of Shariat Appellate Bench in the case Pakistan and others v. Public-at-Large and others PLD 1987 SC 304. They again brought the matter before the Service Tribunal but the same was dismissed hopelessly time-barred.
2. In seeking leave to appeal against this decision of the Tribunal, the learned counsel for the Petitioners has contended that in view of the constit tional bar to their agitating before the Service Tribunal or any other forum, t the matter could not be agitated further either before the Service Tribunal or in the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. It was only when this provision was struck down by the Supreme Court in a Shariat matter that an occasion arose for taking up the grievance and after filing representation with the departmental authorities, appeals were filed forthwith before the Service Tribunal.
3. We find that with the decision of the Service Tribunal in the two matters and by the act of the Petitioners in the others in not pursuing the matter, it became a past and closed matter and could not be revived unless there be express words of the statute. There being none, the petitioners cannot seek remedy in 1987 against an order passed in 1980. Besides, the judgment of the Shariat Appellate Bench has a prospective effect and does not deal with cases already concluded or decided.
4. No question of law of public importance, as required under Article 212(3) of the question, arises in these cases and the leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.