1. ' WAHEEDUDDI AHMAD, J.-The office objection is that the petition is barred by 432 days. The High Court in this case, delivered the judgment on the 31st October 1972. The petitioner moved an application for review of this judgment in the High Court on the 7th November 1972. The Review petition was dismissed on the 11th February 1974. The petition for special leave to appeal was filed on the 7th March 1974.
2. The explanation of the petitioner is that the original order passed by the High Court on the 31st October 1972, was substituted by an order of the review petition dated the 11th February 1974, and the time for filing the petition for special leave to appeal started running from the 11th February 1974. The explanation of the petitioner is not satisfactory. The utmost the petitioner can demand is that the time taken by him in pursuing the remedy of review petition should be taken into consideration for condo nation of delay. We are inclined to exclude the time taken in pursuing the review petition, but there is no explanation why the petition was filed on the 7th March 1974. The petitioner should have filed the petition for special leave to appeal immediately after the 11th February 1974. This being so, the petition is barred by time and is dismissed accordingly. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.