' The above petitions are barred by 115 days. Mr. M.A. Zafar, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner submits that the office has miscalculated the period for the purpose of computing limitation. He further contends that the petitioner was not represented before the High Court and the Additional Advocate-General, who entered appearance on Court's call, did not inform the petitioner about the passing of the impugned judgment. It is, however, not stated in the application for the condonation of delay that the learned Additional Advocate-General was not authorised to appear on behalf of the Market Committee.
2. Be that as it may, if the learned Additional Advocate-General had not informed the petitioner as to the fate of the writ petitions, the opposite-party cannot be penalised for his omission. The petitioner may, if so advised, take appropriate steps available under the law against the Law Officer.
3. With the above observation, all the petitions are dismissed being barred by time.