high court of balochistan annual report 2003 items/publications/reports of the ljcp/reports... ·...

High Court of BalochistanAnnual Report 2003

Published by

LAW AND JUSTICE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN

THIS PAGE BLANK

High Court of BalochistanAnnual Report 2003

c©2004 National Judicial (Policy Making) CommitteeThis Annual Report is published by the Secretariat of the

Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan

This report can be viewed at the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan website http://www.ljcp.com.pk. Comments and sugges-

tions may be sent to the Secretariat of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, Supreme Court Building, Islamabad. Tel:051-9220483,

051-9214797 Fax: 051-9214416 email:[email protected].

Contents

1 FOREWORD BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE 1

2 HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN AND ITS ORGANISATION 52.1 Short History of the High Court of Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52.2 Jurisdiction, Functions, Benches and Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52.3 Working of MIT in the High Court of Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.3.1 Enabling rules/instructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.3.2 Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.3.3 Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.3.4 Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

A) Working of the Subordinate judiciary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7B) Redressal of Public Grievances/Complaints. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.3.5 Public Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.4 Law Officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.5 High Court of Balochistan Composition 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.5.1 The Chief Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102.5.2 The Judges of the High Court of Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102.5.3 Registrar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.6 Bio-data of Mr. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, Chief Justice High Court of Balochistan 122.7 Judges of the High Court of Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3 SIGNIFICANT JUDGEMENTS OF THE COURT DURING THE YEAR 2003 173.1 Ghulam Akbar Lasi and others v. Returning Officer for NA-270 Awaran cum Lasbella

at Uthal and others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223.2 Nadia Mehreen v. Selection Committee for Admission to 1st year M.B.B.S. Bolan

Medical College, Sessions 2002-2003 through Chairman Public Service Commission,Quetta and & 3 others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

3.3 Bashir Ahmed & 2 others v. Hussain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373.4 Haji Bostan Ali v. The State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453.5 Muhammad Aslam Shah v. Fida Muhammad & another . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483.6 Nawabzada Mir Balach Khan Marri through Attorney v. Appellate Election Tribunal,

Balochistan through Registrar, Balochistan High Court & 2 others . . . . . . . . . . 53

4 THE HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN—ANNUAL JUDICIALCONFERENCE 61

5 THE HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN—JUDICIAL ACTIVITY 675.1 Consolidated Statement for High Court of Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 675.2 High Court of Balochistan, Principal Seat at Quetta: Statement Showing Category-

wise Pendency, Institution and Disposal of Cases for the Year, 2003 . . . . . . . . . 685.3 High Court of Balochistan, Bench at Sibi: Statement Showing Category-wise Pen-

dency, Institution and Disposal of Cases for the Year, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

i

6 THE SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY OF BALOCHISTAN—JUDICIALACTIVITY 736.1 Consolidated Statement for the Entire Subordinate Judiciary of Balochistan . . . . 736.2 Consolidated Statement for Sessions Courts Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746.3 Consolidated Statement for Civil Judges, Judicial Magistrates and Qazis . . . . . . 746.4 Statements Showing Category-wise Pendency, Institution and Disposal of Cases for

the Subordinate Judiciary for the Year, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 756.5 District-wise Consolidated Statements for the Subordinate Judiciary . . . . . . . . . 81

7 DELAY REDUCTION AND PERFORMANCE INCENTIVES 897.1 Delay Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897.2 Judicial Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 917.3 Judicial Performance Incentive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927.4 Process Serving Establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

8 COURTS PROFESSIONALISATION PLAN 998.1 Courts Professionalisation Plan (2003-2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998.2 Citizen-Court Liaison Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018.3 Criminal Justice Coordination Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

9 SEPARATION OF THE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL COURTS:ACTION PLAN (2002-2003 to 2003-2005) 109

10 AUTOMATION PLAN 115

11 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 11911.1 The Registrar High Court of Balochistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11911.2 Officers of the Balochistan High Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12011.3 Sanctioned Strength of the High Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12111.4 Sanctioned Strength of the Sessions Courts: Under Head C-I . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12211.5 Sanctioned Strength of the Subordinate Courts: Under Head C-II . . . . . . . . . . 12211.6 Judicial Officers Retired From 1994–2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

11.6.1 District and Sessions Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12411.6.2 Additional District & Sessions Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12411.6.3 Civil Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12411.6.4 Judicial Magistrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12411.6.5 Members of Majlis-e-Shoora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12511.6.6 Qazis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

11.7 Process Serving Establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12611.8 Organisational Chart of the High Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12611.9 Organisational Chart of the Provincial Judiciary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12711.10Organisational Chart of a Typical Sessions Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12711.11Budgetary Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

12 COURT BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES 13712.1 Court Building and Security Arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13712.2 Facilities for Advocates and the Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13712.3 Development Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

ii

12.4 Progress Report of Development Schemes Launched Under the Access to JusticeProgramme Loan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

13 FORMER CHIEF JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT OFBALOCHISTAN 143

14 PHOTOGRAPHS 147

iii

THIS PAGE BLANK

iv

1 FOREWORD

(In the name of Allah, Most Beneficent, Most Merciful)

I am deeply satisfied in presenting the 3rd Annual Report of the Balochistan Judiciary, whichembraces the performance of the worthy Judges of the High Court of Balochistan as well as theperformance of the Subordinate Courts during the year 2003. The achievements and performanceof the Judges speak loudly in figures as compared to the presentation in narrative text, yet theundaunted efforts of my brother Judges in the High Court and the Subordinate Courts representsa continuing success story that is the basis of genuine pride. These achievements appear to beremarkable when the problems of far flung locations of the Courts, the moderate or negligiblefacilities of Court houses and residential accommodation, and the frequent lack of proper transportare taken into account.

The year under report found the number of Judges at the High Court of Balochistan to remainat six as compared to a sanctioned strength of eight. Thirty positions remained vacant in thesubordinate judiciary as against a total strength of 155, thus, with the present strength of 125Judges, as 9 are working against ex-cadre posts, every other Judge had to share the work load ofsome vacant position. During the period of present report, there has been a sizeable decrease in thenumber of cases instituted at the principal seat of the High Court of Balochistan, which were 7008during the year 2002. this number decreased to 3562 during the year 2003. A total of 3974 cases weredisposed of, thereby leaving a balance of 2319 cases to be disposed of with fresh institutions duringthe year 2004. At Sibi, the institution figure of 458 cases at the High Court Bench for the year 2002has increased moderately to 490 during the year 2003. After disposal of 580 cases, 258 cases are leftfor disposal during the subsequent year. It is pertinent to clarify that one Judge out of the presentstrength of six Judges has been deputed on annual full time basis to the High Court Bench at Sibi,while another Judge joins him on each Saturday for disposal of Division Bench cases. Thus, thework both at the Principal Seat and at the Sibi Bench has been managed effectively. In additionto this, Judges have been assigned to work as Member Election Tribunal, Judge Customs, LabourAppellate Tribunal, and benches to deal with NAB, ATC and Banking cases. It is anticipated thatwith filling up of remaining two positions, the pendency figures would further decrease. Accordingto the existing practice, the oldest cases are fixed at the top so that the old pendency is curtailed ata greater pace. Similar instructions have also been passed on to the subordinate judiciary to containthe number of old pending cases under a strict regimen of delay reduction.

The consolidated figures for the subordinate judiciary of Balochistan show a slight increase in thenumber of case institution. This number of 21325 for the year 2002 increased to 21729 during the year2003. After disposal of 21259 cases during the period under report, a total of 5605 cases remained tobe disposed of during the next year. Accordingly, on an average, every Judicial Officer has slightlyover 40 cases on file and none of the Judicial Officers has more than 250 cases at any one timeduring the whole year. consequently, the number of cases with each Judicial Officer is manageableand this fact also reflects the successful implementation of the delay reduction methodology. Themethodology is coupled with strict monitoring by the Inspection Branch as well as measures of

High Court of Balochistan Annual Report 2003: 1

keeping a strong vigil on the performance of Subordinate Court Judges. A special proforma hasbeen distributed whereby every Judge in the High Court, sitting in appeal, reports about the casehandling, quality of the assessment of evidence and judgement writing skill of the Judges. This isplaced on the personal file of respective Judicial Officer and is helpful in the preparation of hisA.C.R.

The performance of Accountability Courts, Banking Court, Court for offences under BankingLaws, Drug Court and Anti Terrorism Courts as well as of Presiding Officers of three Labour Courtshave remained exemplary despite the fact that the District & Sessions Judges at Quetta, Sibi andLasbella have to hold the additional charge of the later three Courts. It is also a matter of satisfactionthat the construction of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Barkhan at Rakhni with residencesin a Court Complex has been completed while the construction work of the Court of JudicialMagistrate and Qazi Court at Kohlu is nearing completion. Under the “Access to Justice Program,”three development schemes, that is, construction of residential accommodation at Hub, constructionof additional rooms and first floor of the Sessions Court, Khuzdar, and construction of Courtand residential accommodation for Judicial Magistrate and Civil Judge, Usta Muhammad havealso been taken in hand. Under the revised budget allocation, the Court and residence of JudicialMagistrate, Sinjavi and Duki has been approved along with construction of Bungalow for PresidingOfficer, Labour Court, Sibi to be started during the current financial year. Furthermore, the worktowards the achievement of conditionalities under the Access to Justice Program has been followedstrictly including the holding of meetings of Citizen Court Liaison Committees, Criminal JusticeCoordination Committees and Bench Bar Committees formulated under the Chairmanship of allDistrict & Sessions Judges. Thus, with the plan of work as broadly detailed in the comprehensiveannual report for the year 2002 and included in the report for the current year, the work for thebetterment of judiciary in general and for the benefit of litigant public in particular is being carriedout on extensive basis and with the untiring efforts of the Judicial Officers. It is anticipated that theprime object of speedy and inexpensive justice will be achieved and the facility of seeking justicewill also be available to all and sundry at their doorstep.

Raja Fayyaz Ahmed,Chief Justice,

High Court of Balochistan,Quetta.

2 High Court of Balochistan Annual Report 2003

HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN

AND ITS ORGANISATION


THIS PAGE BLANK


2 HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN

AND ITS ORGANISATION

2.1 Short History of the High Court of Balochistan

The Balochistan High Court has entered into the 28th year of its inception, yet is the youngest ascompared to the other High Courts of the country. At the birth of our homeland Pakistan there usedto be a Judicial Commissioner in Balochistan prior to the establishment of the erstwhile High Courtof West Pakistan on 14th October, 1955.However on its dissolution on 1st July, 1970, a joint HighCourt for the Provinces of Sindh and Balochistan was established, which remained as such upto 30thNovember, 1976, when separate High Court was established for each of the two Provinces. However,the High Court of Balochistan was established on 1st December, 1976 and Hon’ble Mr. Justice MirKhuda Bakhsh Marri as Chief Justice while Mr. Justice M.A. Rasheed (now Vice Chancellor of theUniversity of Balochistan) and Mr. Justice Zakaullah Lodhi (since died) were transferred to the newHigh Court at Quetta. During the first decade of its establishment, the strength of the High Courtof Balochistan remained five, which was lateron enhanced to six and the present strength is eight,against which six Judges are in position and two posts of Judges are lying vacant. The High Courtwas initially established in the present day Sessions Court building, whereas on the construction ofnew building during the year 1993, the High Court was shifted to the present building inauguratedon 4th September, 1993. However, under a revised comprehensive plan for extension of the presentbuilding and to built a small replica of the same in the adjacent vicinity with connecting bridge,a PC-I has been got approved and the construction work to commence during the year 2004. Theadditional building will provide room for record keeping in the basement and for parking of vehicles,while it will also house the offices of officers and staff of the High Court as the present buildingcannot cope with the ever growing need of office space. The extension of the building will facilitatethe functioning of the Judicial Branch in a more congenial manner, which at present is log-jammedwith piles of files and too many staff to sit-in comfortably.

2.2 Jurisdiction, Functions, Benches and Organisation

The High Court of Balochistan being the highest Court of the province in relation to all types of civiland criminal matters, having appellate and revisional jurisdiction as well as under the Constitutionof the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, it deals with matters under its writ jurisdiction. The High Courthaving its principal seat at Quetta, whereas a Bench comprising of a Judge, while another Judgejoins him from principal seat in rotation for Division Bench cases on each Saturday; is functioningat Sibi comprising of civil Divisions of Sibi and Nasirabad. The High Court being the highestforum for all intent and purposes of law, also has supervisory function of the administration andsuperintendence of the subordinate courts in Balochistan. There are three types of subordinate CivilCourts; (i) Courts exercising jurisdiction under the Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962 i.e., District Judge,Additional District Judge, Senior Civil Judge and Civil Judges of Ist, 2nd and 3rd Class; (ii) QaziCourts with its appellate forum to be Majlis-e-Shura under Dastur-ul-Amal Diwani Kalat, 1952; and(iii) Qazi Courts functioning under the Balochistan Civil Disputes (Shariat Application) Regulation1976 in tribal areas of Balochistan, having appellate forum as Majlis-e-Shura. On criminal side, allthe subordinate Courts i.e. Sessions Judge, Additional Sessions Judge and Judicial Magistrate areestablished under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898. The composition and organization chart ofthe High Court of Balochistan as well as of subordinate Courts have been annexed for convenience


and ready reference. The Administrative structure of the High Court has also been annexed for aquick overview.

In addition to the above, there are Special Courts and Tribunals including Banking Court; DrugCourt; Anti Terrorism Courts; Accountability Courts; Special Court (Offences in respect of Banks);as well as Service Tribunal; Election tribunal in the High Court are functioning in the provinceunder the administrative control of the High Court of Balochistan.

The High Court in the superintendence capacity ensures that appropriate buildings, staff andrecurring funds are made available to each Court while the functioning and performance of eachCourt is strictly monitored to ensure smooth functioning and to get redressal of the grievance ofthe general public at a quicker pace with least of botheration.

2.3 Working of MIT in the High Court of Balochistan

In order to fulfil the supervisory and inspection functions required of the superior judiciary, adetailed mechanism has been evolved at the Balochistan High Court under the overall supervisionand guidance of the Chief Justice High Court of Balochistan. The working of the Inspection Branchat the High Court of Balochistan is detailed below:

2.3.1 Enabling rules/instructions

The Inspection Branch works in the light of instructions issued from time to time by the ChiefJustice of the High Court. The broader framework for its working is also governed by the guidelinescontained in the relevant portions of the “High Court Rules and Orders.”

2.3.2 Functions

The following specific functions are being performed by the Inspection Branch of Balochistan HighCourt.

• Monitoring and Evaluation of the progress/performance of each subordinate court on monthlybasis.

• Redressal of public grievances against the subordinate judiciary.

• Redressal of public grievances against the public functionaries from government departments.

• Issuance of necessary instructions (whenever required) to the subordinate judiciary for speed-ing up the disposal of judicial work.

• Receipt and compilation of judicial statistics from the subordinate judiciary.

• Receipt of judgements from the Sessions Judges for perusal.

• Transfer of cases on the directions of the Chief Justice, High Court of Balochistan.

• Receipt and evaluation of the details about the under trial/convicted prisoners from the prisonauthorities.

• Conduct of surprise visits/ Inspection of Prisons etc for helping illegal detainees.


2.3.3 Structure

The Inspection Branch at Balochistan High Court functions under the overall supervision of theChief Justice of the High Court. The Chief Justice is personally looking after the relevant inspectionmatters in respect of the Quetta (defunct) civil division. The remaining Civil Divisions (defunct)have been assigned to two other Judges of the Balochistan High Court for similar purposes.

The inspection functions are assisted and coordinated (on full time basis) by the District &Sessions Judge (Inspection) who , in turn, is assisted by the Deputy Registrar. There is a fullystaffed full time Inspection Branch that provides office and secretarial support for all the above-mentioned functions.

2.3.4 Process

Following is an outline of the procedures for the functioning of the Inspection Branch.

A) Working of the Subordinate judiciary. All subordinated Courts send monthly returnsshowing the disposal and pendency figures in respect of the relevant courts. These returns arereceived from the District and Sessions judges, Additional District and Sessions judges, Majalis-e-Shoora, Civil Judges, Qazis and the judicial Magistrates. These returns and figures for disposalare thoroughly scrutinised by the Inspection Branch. There is a minimum limit for units, which allPresiding Officers are required to earn on monthly basis. In case, the units earned are below theminimum requirement, the necessary steps to redeem the situation are undertaken by the relevantJudges. Similarly, an up to the mark performance by the presiding officers is appreciated in anappropriate manner.

B) Redressal of Public Grievances/Complaints. There is a comprehensive mechanism forattending to and redressing the complaints received form the common public. The Chief Justice ofthe High Court directly supervises the process. These complaints may be against the conduct ofa member of the subordinate judiciary or against the high handedness of any public functionary.All correspondence in this regard is personally perused/inspected by the Chief Justice of the HighCourt for issuing instructions as deem necessary.

All complaints are properly entered in the “Complaint Register,” maintained in the office ofComplaint Section. The complaints so received are sent to relevant quarters for remedial measures.A proper follow up of the complaints, in the light of the instructions of the Chief Justice is ensured.The District and Sessions Judge (Inspection) constantly monitors the progress and the outcome ofthis system.

In addition to the above, the complaints sent through post by the general public consistingof allegations against Government functionaries, local representatives, police, staff of subordinatejudiciary or Judicial Officers, are taken upon personally by the Hon’ble Chief Justice. The directionsfor the resolution of grievances are issued promptly to the concerned while certain matters requiresthorough probe or inquiry, which is get done through the concerned District and Sessions Judgeor a Judge of the High Court and the delinquents are taken to task, and matters are pursued tillthe grievance is resolved to the hilt. Further, on matters of public importance, the complaints areconverted into suo-motu reference and taken up and disposed of expeditiously in the High Court,resulting into immediate and inexpensive relief to the needy and oppressed. This initiative on thepart of Hon’ble Chief Justice, has resulted into redressal of scores of grievances of the general publicin matters of days, for which, otherwise, they have to seek remedy running from pillar to post formonths, without any tangible result.


2.3.5 Public Information

The litigants and common public are encouraged to approach the High Court of Balochistan for theredressal of their grievances against the Subordinate Judiciary as well as other public functionaries.The Inspection Branch of the High Court of Balochistan has received a little over 100 complaintsover the last eleven months from public.

However, the following additional measures are being considered for implementation to informlitigants and the public about the usefulness of the Inspection Wing of the High Court. The purposeis to encourage people to approach the Superior Judiciary for the redressal of injustices and highhandedness committed against them.

• The outline of the functioning of the Inspection Branch is being displayed on the NoticeBoards in the court premises to enable the people to know about the redressal mechanism fortheir genuine grievances.

• All District and Sessions Judges are being asked to display similar information prominentlyin the respective district court complexes for the information of the litigants.

The High Court of Balochistan is also taking necessary steps to finalise the practices of theInspection Branch in the form of well-defined rules. It may be added, however, that the functioningof the Inspection Branch at present is also well organised, streamlined and appropriate for thespecific conditions of the province.

It is also pertinent to mention here that as a regular feature, necessary directions, orders, adviceand instructions etc., are issued relating to the Court functioning and conveyed to all the subordi-nate Judicial Officers for improvement of their working capacity and to keep them abreast of thelatest changes in law/rules for their guidance, under the functions of the office of Sessions Judge(Inspection). A typical format of one such letter is reproduced below for significance:

To:All the District & Sessions Judges In Balochistan.

SUB: MAINTENANCE OF RECORD IN CIVIL/CRIMINAL CASES

It has been observed that in most of the civil cases, the record is not maintained properly bythe Presiding Officers of the Civil Courts as per instructions contained in High Court (Rules andOrders). I am, therefore to convey that the Hon’ble Chief Justice has directed that the followinginstructions must be adhered to while maintaining record in the civil cases:

1. The documents filed by the plaintiff with plaint or otherwise be kept separately in an enve-lope and an index containing details of each and every document be placed on record withsignatures of the Presiding Officer and detail of documents be also written on the envelope.likewise similar set be prepared for documents filed and relied upon by the other party.

2. The documents produced in evidence be immediately marked/exhibited in red ink and signedby the Presiding Officer with date and be kept in a separate envelope consisting details ofdocuments and these envelopes should separately be prepared for each party, so that at anytime the exhibits could be inspected without difficulty.

3. It has also been observed that on appearance of officials like Qanoongo, Patwari or represen-tative of a department, the documents produced are marked and kept on record and a simplesentence in his evidence portion is written that ”the witness has produced summoned recordand after inspection Ex. P/1-A to Ex: P/1-G are placed on record.” However no mention is


made in the statement of witness separately for each document and from evidence portion itcannot be ascertained as to what type of documents were produced by the witness. Thus foreach document presented in evidence, complete details recorded to avoid any confusion at alater stage.

4. Also each exhibited document should contain exhibit/mark number with date and signedconspicuously so that the same be recognized promptly from evidence, while all exhibiteddocuments be kept in tidy condition sequentially.

5. While forwarding record to the superior forum in appeal etc, the record of each file shouldbe numbered and proper indexing be made, so that particular information/documents beretrieved from the respective portion.

6. Similar formalities must also be observed while maintaining the record in criminal cases;wherein exhibits are to be numbered serially and annexed to the statement of each witnessrespectively.

The aforementioned instructions must be strictly adhered to and be brought to the notice ofall subordinate Courts for compliance. Also in case of any discrepancy found in the record, theconcerned Presiding Officer will be personally held responsible and would be subjected to disciplinaryaction.

Sd.REGISTRAR

2.4 Law Officers

The Deputy Attorney General, being Law Officer, represents the Federal Government, whereas Ad-vocate General, Additional Advocate General and Assistant Advocate General, represents provincialgovernment of Balochistan before the High Court of Balochistan and the Honourable Apex Court ofPakistan. In subordinate Courts, District Attorneys and Assistant District Attorneys represents thecivil cases against the provincial government departments, while in all criminal cases, the said attor-neys do represent the State cases and in some other cases, Special Public Prosecutors are assignedwith brief of cases where it deem necessary by the government. Except for the Deputy Attorneygeneral, all the other law officers are functioning under the administrative control of the ProvincialLaw Department, Balochistan. Also under a phased programme, the office and residential facilitiesare being constructed under the auspices of the Access to Justice Programme funding.


2.5 High Court of Balochistan Composition 2003

2.5.1 The Chief Justice

Mr. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmad 28.04.2000

2.5.2 The Judges of the High Court of Balochistan

Mr. Justice Amanullah Khan 27.01.1997Mr. Justice Fazal-ur-Rahman 21.06.1999Mr. Justice Ahmed Khan Lashari 06.09.2000Mr. Justice Akhter Zaman Malghani 05.09.2002Mr. Justice Muhammad Nadir Khan 05.09.2002

2.5.3 Registrar

Dr. Abdur Rehman Brahui 09.05.1997


Chief Justice High Court of Balochistan

2.6 Bio-data of Mr. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, Chief Justice HighCourt of Balochistan

• Born at Quetta on 1st June, 1946;

• Received his early education at Government Sandeman High School Quetta;

• Passed the Intermediate Examination from Board of Intermediate & SecondaryEducation Punjab;

• Graduated from Government College Quetta.

• Obtained the LL.B. Degree from University Law College, Punjab University,Lahore;

• Enrolled as an Advocate in the year 1968 with the West Pakistan Bar Counciland started practising law at Quetta;

• Honorary lecturer from 1986 to 1989 at the University Law College Quetta,and also for the Session of 1995;

• Appointed as Legal Advisor to the Quetta Municipal Corporation from June,1980 to April, 1985, and for the second term from July, 1987 to February, 1990;

• Elected twice as Joint Secretary and General Secretary of the Balochistan BarAssociation;

• Elected un-opposed as President of the Balochistan Bar Association in theyear 1992-93;

• Elevated to the Bench in the month of January, 1997;

• Appointed as Chief Justice of the High Court of Balochistan on 25th April,2000;

• Took oath of the Office of Chief Justice on 28th April, 2000.


2.7 Judges of the High Court of Balochistan

Mr. Justice Amanullah Khan, Senior Puisne Judge

Born at Quetta on 7th August, 1954. Matriculated from Cantt.Public School, Quetta in the year 1970; Passed the IntermediateExamination in the year 1972, BA in the year 1974 and MAin the year 1976 from F.C. College, Lahore; Passed the LL.B.Examination from Punjab University in the year 1980; Joinedthe Bar in January, 1981; Remained Vice President of Balochis-tan Bar Association in 1988-89; Taught as honorary lecturer inUniversity Law College, Quetta from 1989 to 1996; RemainedPresident of Balochistan Bar Association in the year 1994-95;Elevated as Judge of the High Court of Balochistan in Febru-ary, 1997.

Mr. Justice Fazal-ur-Rahman

Matriculated from Islamia High School, Quetta in the year 1963;Passed B.Com from Government College of Commerce and Eco-nomics Karachi in 1967; Passed the LL.B. Examination from theUniversity of Karachi in the year 1969; Stood all round first inPPSI Course; Appointed as Presiding Officer Labour Court inthe year of 1978 and worked as Presiding Officer/AdditionalDistrict & Sessions Judge and then promoted as District &Sessions Judge on 20-12-1983; He remained Special Judge Anti-Corruption Balochistan; Worked as District & Sessions Judgeat various stations in the Province of Balochistan from time totime; Has completed the Shariah Course from Shariah AcademyInternational Islamic University Islamabad from 20-10-1982 to20-01-1983; Passed the Seventh Advanced Course in Manage-ment conducted by NIPA Quetta; Appointed as Member InquiryCommittee by the Government of Balochistan in 1989 to lookinto the irregularities committed by MPAs; Appointed as mem-ber of Commission during the year 1992 to determine the newlimits of Municipal Corporation Quetta; Remained Law Sec-retary, Government of Balochistan, for a period of more thantwo years; Elevated as Additional Judge to the High Court ofBalochistan on 21-06-99; Appointed as permanent Judge of thesaid Court on 06-06-2000.


Mr. Justice Ahmed Khan Lashari

Born at Quetta on 05-01-1954; Matriculated from GovernmentCentral High School Quetta in 1970; Passed Intermediate in 1972from Intermediate and Secondary Education Board; Passed B.Ain the year 1980 and M.A in English Literature in 1982 fromUniversity of Balochistan, Quetta; Passed the LL.B Examina-tion in 1982 from University Law College, Quetta; Enrolled asan Advocate on 23-05-1984 and as Advocate of the High Courton 27-05-1986; Remained as Advocate General of Balochistanwith effect from 12-04-1997 to 28-01-1998; Elevated as Addi-tional Judge of the High Court of Balochistan on 06-09-2000and confirmed on 06-09-2001.

Mr. Justice Akhter Zaman Malghani

Born at Loralai in a respectable Malghani Tribe on 10-02-1952;Passed B.A. and LL.B form Quetta and enrolled as Advocate ofsubordinate courts on 05-09-1979 and then as an Advocate ofthe High Court on 03-09-1996; Appointed Additional AdvocateGeneral Balochistan on 30-04-2001 and remained Honorary Lec-turer of University Law College Balochistan, during 1997-2000;Remained General Secretary of High Court Bar Association, for1997-1999; Appointed as Prosecuting Sub Inspector in Feb, 1975and promoted as Prosecuting Inspector in 1977 and then re-signed in March, 1979; Appointed as Judge of High Court ofBalochistan, on 05-09-2002.

Mr. Justice Muhammad Nadir Khan

Born in a respectable tribe of Muhammad Zai Durrani on March,2, 1956 at Quetta; Passed M.A English and LL.B from Uni-versity of Balochistan; Enrolled as an Advocate on December21, 1980 and practised till November 5, 1986; Appointed asAdditional District & Sessions Judge on November 6, 1986;Appointed as Director Incharge Wafaqi Secretariat RegionalOffice, Quetta from 14-12-1991 till 14-09-1983 and RegistrarBalochistan High Court from 14-09-1994 till 09-05-1997 alsoSpecial Judge Anti-Corruption from 29-03-1994 till 09-05-1997;Remained Judge, Banking Court of Balochistan, Quetta from09-05-1997 till 25-09-2001 and Judge Special Court (Offencesin respect of Banks) Balochistan, Quetta from 29-10-1997 till04-09-2002; Also worked as Chairman, Drug Court Balochistan,Quetta from 07-10-1998 till 04-09-2002 and Judge, Accountabil-ity Court-II Balochistan, Quetta from 02-09-2002 till 04-09-2002;Appointed as Judge High Court of Balochistan, on 05-09-2002.


Significant Judgements of the Court During 2003


THIS PAGE BLANK


3 SIGNIFICANT JUDGEMENTS OF THE COURT DUR-

ING THE YEAR 2003

A list of reported cases of the High Court of Balochistan is given below:—

1. PLD 2003 Quetta 1

Before Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, C.J., Akhtar Zaman Malghani & Muhammad Nadir Khan, JJ

Ghulam Akbar Lasi & others — PetitionersVersus

Returning Officer for NA-270, Awaran-Cum-Lasbella at Uthal & another — Respondents

Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J.


Before Fazal-ur-Rahman, J

Amanullah & others — Convict/AppellantsVersus

The State — Respondent


Before Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, C.J. & Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J

Khan Habbash Barakzai —- PetitionersVersus

FG Degree College, Quetta & another — Respondents.



Before Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, C.J.

Haji Bostan Ali — ApplicantVersus

The State —– Respondent



Muhammad Aslam Shah — AppellantVersus

Fida Muhammad & another — Respondents




Nawabzada Mir Balach Khan Marri through Attorney — PetitionerVersus

Appellate Election Tribunal, Balochistan through Registrar, Balochistan High Court & 2 others— Respondents.




Nawabzada Mir Balach Khan Marri through Attorney — PetitionerVersus

Mir Mohabat Khan Marri & 4 others — Respondents



Before Muhammad Nadir Khan, J

Mst. Raj Bibi — PetitionerVersus

Mst. Shahzadi & 4 others — Respondents


Akhtar Zaman Malghani & Muhammad Nadir Khan, JJ

Bashir Ahmed — AppellantVersus


Muhammad Nadir Khan, J.


Before Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J

Farukh Nawaz — AppellantVersus

Faisal Ajmal & 2 others — Respondents



Baz Muhammad — AppellantVersus




Before Amanullah Khan Yasinzai & Fazal-ur-Rahman, JJ


Major (R) Nadir Ali — AppellantVersus


Amanullah Khan, J.



Arbab Muhammad Hashim Kasi & 4 others — PetitionerVersus

Federation of Pakistan, Ministry of Law & Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad & 2 others —Respondents



Maulana Amir Zaman Bukhari — PetitionerVersus

Election Commission of Pakistan & 9 others — Respondents

Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, CJ.



Muhammad Aslam Bhotani — PetitionerVersus

Election Tribunal & 2 others — Respondents

Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, CJ.

16. PLD 2003 Quetta 109

Before Amanullah Khan & Fazal-ur-Rahman, JJ

Muhammad Ayub & others — AppellantsVersus

The State & others — Respondents

Amanullah Khan, J.

17. PLD 2003 Quetta 122

Before Fazal-ur-Rahman, J

Qaiser Khan — AppellantVersus


18. PLD 2003 Quetta 128

Before Amanullah Khan, J


Haji Baz Muhammad & another — PetitionersVersus

Mst. Humera alias Shireen Taj & 3 others — Respondents

19. PLD 2003 Quetta 131


Mst. Farah Iqbal — PetitionersVersus

Muhammad Anwar & 2 others — Respondents

Amanullah Khan, J.

20. PLD 2003 Quetta 136

Before Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J

Buzarg Jamil and others — AppellantsVersus

Haji Abdul Bari & others — Respondents

21. PLD 2003 Quetta 142

Before Amanullah Khan & Ahmed Khan Lashari, JJ

Mst. Shereen Gul — AppellantVersus

Jameel Ahmed Paracha — Respondent

Amanullah Khan, J.

22. PLD 2003 Quetta 147


Mukhtar Hussain — AppellantVersus

Muhammad Ayub & 4 others — Respondents



Haji Bismillah — PetitionerVersus

Government of Balochistan through Secretary, Home Department, Civil Secretariat, Quettaand 5 others — Respondents

Fazal-ur-Rahman, J


Before Ahmed Khan Lashari, Akhtar Zaman Malghani & Muhammad Nadir Khan Durrani, JJ


Aamir & others — AppellantsVersus

The State —–Respondent

Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J


Before Muhammad Nadir Khan Durrani, JJ

Muhammad Ashraf & 3 others — AppellantsVersus



Before Amanullah Khan & Ahmed Khan Lashari, JJ

The State — AppellantVersus

Qadir Bakhsh and others — Respondents

Amanullah Khan, J



Nadia Mehreen — AppellantVersus

Selection Committee for admission to 1st year M.B.B.S. Bolan Medical College, Sessions2002-2003 through Chairman Public Service Commission, Quetta and & 3 others —

Respondents

Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, C.J.



Bashir Ahmed & 2 others — PetitionersVersus

Hussain — Respondent


3.1 Ghulam Akbar Lasi and others v. Returning Officer for NA-270Awaran cum Lasbella at Uthal and others

JUDGMENT SHEETIN THE HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA.

Constitutional Petition Nos. 478, 479 and 480 of 2002.Decided on 19th September, 2002.

Date of hearing: 16th September, 2002.

JUDGMENT

Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J—By this judgment, we intend to dispose of constitution peti-tion Nos.478, 479 and 480 of 2002 as these matters are directed against common judgment dated12.09.2002, passed by the Election Tribunal Balochistan, Quetta in Election Petition Nos.1/2002,2/2002 and 3/2002 filed by the petitioner involving identical question of law and facts.

We do not consider it necessary to Marshall the facts of each case except mentioning that thepetitioner filed his nomination papers for contesting election from NA-270 (Lasbella cum Awaran),PB-44 (Lasbella-I) and PB-45 (Lasbella-II) in the forthcoming election which were rejected at thetime of scrutiny by the respective Returning Officers, on the ground that the petitioner had enteredinto plea of bargaining under NAB Ordinance, as such, he was debarred from contesting election.

Being aggrieved by the said orders the petitioner preferred above mentioned Election Petitionsbefore Election Tribunal Balochistan, as provided by section 14(5) of The Representation of thePeople Act, 1976 which were dismissed vide impugned judgment.

We have heard learned Counsel for petitioner M/s Muhammad Aslam Chishti, Senior Advo-cate, Hadi Shakeel Ahmed Advocate and Deputy Attorney General assisted by learned AssistantAdvocate General and Learned Deputy Prosecutor General (on Court notice).

The edifice of arguments of Mr. Muhammad Aslam Chishti, Senior advocate was that the peti-tioner’s nomination papers were rejected by the respective Returning Officers on the basis of letterdated 9th February, 2002 wherein a list of 105 persons were provided, showing them disqualifiedunder the NAB Ordinance, but Returning Officers failed to take note of the fact that said letterwas cancelled by a subsequent letter dated 12.06.2002. According to him in the first letter the nameof petitioner did appear at serial No.48 but by subsequent letter the number of disqualified personswere curtailed to 23 and the name of petitioner was not amongst those persons, as such, ReturningOfficer as well as Election Tribunal was wrong in coming to conclusion that petitioner was debarredfrom contesting election.

It was further argued that petitioner was Federal Minister for Labour, Man Power and OverseasPakistanis and he had nothing to do with Bela Builders to which the contract for construction ofLabour Colony was awarded on higher rates and was, in fact, owned by his brother Abdul SattarLasi. He maintained that although; petitioner was arrested by NAB authorities and released underthe order of Chairman but according to him, petitioner never entered into plea of bargain nor hefiled any application to this effect. The amount was also not deposited by him but by Bela Buildersowned by his brother. To further substantiate his arguments he invited our intention to copy ofdraft, Income Tax Return and application on behalf of Abdul Sattar Lasi for Pay Order against thecheque drawn by him.

It was further argued that matter in hand involves depriving a citizen of right of franchise,therefore, Section-25 and 15 must be strictly construed and before debarring petitioner from takingpart in election, it must be proved that he entered into plea of bargain himself and deposited theamount. He also referred to an affidavit purported to be sworn by Abdul Sattar Lasi and annexedwith the petition and argued that petitioner had no concern with Bela Builder and the amount was


deposited by Abdul Sattar Lasi, Sole Proprietor of the said Firm, as such, the petitioner cannotbe held responsible for the acts of his brother nor he can be debarred from contesting election byinvoking provisions of Section 15 of the NAB Ordinance.

On the point of jurisdiction learned counsel was of the view that this Court has the jurisdictionunder Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, to look into the legalityand proprietary of the impugned judgment. He referred to judgment reported in 1994 SCMR 1299(Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi case).

Controverting the arguments advanced by petitioner’s counsel, learned Deputy Attorney Generalstated that under Article 63(L) of Constitution read with Article 8 D (2) (q) of The Conduct ofGeneral Elections Order, 2002 and 99 of The Representation of the People Act, 1976 a person isdisqualified from contesting election if he is convicted or is disqualified from contesting electionunder any law for the time being in force. In support of his submissions he referred to proviso ofsection 15 of NAB Ordinance. Further advancing his case learned Deputy Attorney General referredto warrant of release dated 10.03.2002 issued by Chairman, National Accountability Bureau inrespect of petitioner and another warrant of release dated 17.4.2002, issued in respect of co-accusedMuhammad Naeem. He stressed that the petitioner was arrested under the charges of corruptionand corrupt practices as defined in NAB Ordinance and released on plea of bargain, as such, thecase of petitioner falls within the definition of Section 15 first proviso of NAB Ordinance.

In addition, the learned Deputy Attorney General stated that the petitioner was also convictedin another Reference No.01/1997 by the Accountability Tribunal of this court on 25.08.1997, and hisappeal against said conviction order is pending before Hon’ble Supreme Court. Although sentenceawarded to him was suspended by the Hon’ble Supreme Court but even then he will be deemed tobe a convicted person for the purpose of Article 63, Article 8D of Election Order, 2002 and Section99 of The Representation of People Act, 1976. To substantiate his arguments he referred to Black’sLaw Dictionary wherein “suspended sentence” has been defined as under:—

A conviction of a crime followed by a sentence that is given formally, but not actually served.A suspended sentence in criminal law means in effect that defendant is not required at thetime sentence is imposed to serve the sentence”.

Regarding jurisdiction learned Deputy Attorney General argued that under Article-225 of Con-stitution election disputes are immune from the jurisdiction of this Court. However, if any decisionof the Election Tribunal is “coram non judice” then this Court has jurisdiction under Article-199of the Constitution to look into the same. He referred to case law reported in PLD 1989 SC 396 +1996 CLC 1772 + 1997 Quetta 115 and PLD 1999 Quetta-I.

Learned Assistant Advocate General and Deputy Prosecutor General supported the argumentsof Deputy Attorney General. They also referred to case Law reported in PLD 1993 SC 399 and1990 SCMR 1309.

It is pertinent to mention here that counsel appearing for parties were unanimous, in view ofthe rule laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in judgment reported in 1994 SCMR 1299 thatthis Court has jurisdiction to interfere in the judgment of Election Tribunal if its order is withoutjurisdiction, coram non judice or based on malafide, as such, we do not consider it necessary todilate upon the point of jurisdiction.

Coming to the merit of the case in hand it would be beneficial to reproduce Section-25 and 15of the NAB Ordinance:

15. Disqualification to contest elections (or to hold public office):

a. Where an accused person is convicted for the offence of corruption or corrupt practices asspecified in the Schedule to this Ordinance, he shall forthwith cease to hold public office, if any,


held by him and further he shall stand disqualified for a period of ten years, to be reckonedfrom the date he is release after serving the sentence, for seeking or from being elected, chosen,appointed or nominated as a member or representative of any public body or any statutory orlocal authority or in service of Pakistan or of any province.

Provided that any accused person who has availed the benefit of section 25 shall also be deemedto have been convicted for an offence under this Ordinance, and shall forthwith cease to holdpublic office, if any, held by him and further he shall stand disqualified for a period of tenyears, to be reckoned from the date he has discharged his liabilities relating to the matter ortransaction in issue, for seeking or from being elected, chosen, appointed or nominated as amember or representative of any public body or any statutory or local authority or in serviceof Pakistan or of any Province.

25. Voluntary return/pleas bargaining. Where at any time whether before or after the com-mencement of trial the holder of a public office or any other person accused of any offenceunder this Ordinance, returns to the NAB the assets or gains acquired through corruption orcorrupt practices,

i) If the trial has not commenced, the Chairman NAB may released the accused; and

ii) If the Court has taken cognizance of the offence or the trial has commenced, the ChairmanNAB may, with the approval of the Court, release the accused.

Amendment of section 25, Ordinance XVIII of 1999 (i) for sub-section (a) the following shallbe substituted, namely by National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 2001 No.XXXV, dated10th August, 2001:—

(a) Where at any time whether before or after the commencement of trial the holder of apublic offence or any other person accused of any offence under this Ordinance returns to theNAB the assets or gains acquired through corruption or corrupt practices, the Court or theChairman Nab with the approval of the Court or the Appellate court, as the case may be, mayrelease the accused, and

ii) In sub-section (b), for the letters “etc” the words and commas “corporate body, co-operativesociety, statutory body or authority concerned” shall be substituted.)

Plain reading of proviso to section 15 of the Ordinance reveals that any person who has availedbenefit of Section 25 of the Ordinance, he will be deemed to have been convicted under the Ordinanceand shall stand disqualified for a period of 10 years for seeking or from being elected, chosen,appointed or nominated as a member or representative of any public body or any statutory orLocal authority. In order to examine the case of petitioner in the light of above proviso, we; wouldlike to reproduce two warrants of Release issued by Chairman NAB on 10.03.2000 and 17.04.2000respectively.

WARRANT OF RELEASE.Section 25 of NAB Ordinance, 1999.

To,INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,BALOCHISTAN.

WHEREAS Mr. Ghulam Akbar Lasi s/o Juma Khan r/o Mullah Ch. Anwar P.O & TehsilBela, District Lasbela was arrested on the allegation of committing the offence of corruption/corrupt practices, as defined in the National Accountability Bureau.

And whereas the above said accused person has voluntarily paid to the NAB, the assets orgains acquired through corruption and corrupt practices, vide Pay Order No. 0001667 dated21.2.2000, of Prudential Commercial Bank Ltd, main Branch Karachi.


And whereas I have decided to release the accused from custody/detention in exercise of mypowers under Section 25 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999 read with Section 9 (c ) and Section 15of the Ordinance.

Now, therefore, you are directed to release the said accused from custody/ detention forthwith,if not required in any other case.

Sd/Chairman,

National Accountability Bureau,Lt. Gen. Syed Muhammad Amjad).

10th March, 2000

WARRANT OF RELEASE.Section 25 of N.A.B Ordinance, 1999.

To,Inspector General of Police, Balochistan.

WHEREAS Mr. Ghulam Akbar Lasi S/O Juma Khan r/o Mullah Ch. Anwar P.O & TehsilBela, District Lasbela and his co-accused Muhammad Naeem Tareen S/O Abdul Samad Khan,Ex-Chief Engineer, Pak PWD, Quetta, r/o H. No. 514/56-A, Madrasa Road, Quetta Canttwere arrested on the allegation of committing the offence of corruption/corrupt practices asdefined in the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999.

AND WHEREAS Ghulam Akbar Lasi, Ex-Federal Minister and Abdul Sattar Lasi (Benefi-ciary and brother of Ex-Minister) obtained pecuniary advantage in collusion with MuhammadNaeem Tareen, their co-accused. Ghulam Akbar Lasi has voluntarily paid to the NationalAccountability Bureau, the assets or gains acquired through corruption and corrupt prac-tices, vide Pay Order No. 0001667 dated 21.2.2000 of Prudential Commercial Bank Ltd, mainBranch, Karachi.

AND WHEREAS Muhammad Naeem Tareen has voluntarily paid to the National Account-ability Bureau Rs. 10 lac vide Pay Order No. 563255, dated 13.4.2000.

AND WHEREAS I have decided to release the accused Muhammad Naeem Tareen from cus-tody/detention in exercise of my powers under Section 25 of the N.A.B Ordinance, 1999, readwith Section 9 ( c) and Section 15 of the Ordinance.

Now, therefore, you are directed to release the said accused Muhammad Naeem Tareen.

Sd/Chairman

National Accountability Bureau,(Lt. Gen. Syed Muhammad Amjad).

17th April, 2000

The contents of these warrant leave no doubt in our mind that the petitioner was arrested underthe charges of corruption and corrupt practices and was released from custody after gaining thebenefit of plea of bargain as provided by Section-25 of the NAB Ordinance. The arguments of thelearned counsel for petitioner that he had never entered into plea of bargaining have no substancein presence of above referred documents. It does not appeal to mind that a person has been arrestedunder specific charges and then released by taking benefit of an enabling provision; even then he cansay that he is not beneficiary of the said Section. We also do not agree with arguments advanced bylearned counsel that the amount was deposited by the brother of petitioner being proprietor of Bela


Builders, as such, petitioner cannot be held responsible for that act. When a person is under custodyit is natural that the amount would be deposited by any other person on his behalf, obviously hecannot deposit amount himself, therefore, the arguments that the Pay Order was not tendered bypetitioner himself or for that matter amount was arranged by his brother, do not help the caseof petitioner in any way. If he was not the beneficiary of the plea of bargaining, he could havechallenged the same before any court of law or at least by making an application to Chairman NABdenying the plea of bargaining but he kept silent till the rejection of his nomination papers whichshows his active acquiescence by conduct in the plea of bargaining. A person cannot be allowed toapprobate and reprobate in the same breath.

Now reverting to the question as to whether after entering into plea of bargaining and gettinghimself released in consequence thereof he is disqualified from contesting election or otherwise. Therelevant provisions are reproduced hereunder:—

Article 63( p ) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

he is for the time being disqualified from being elected or chosen as a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament ) or of a Provincial Assembly under any law for the time being in force.

Section 99(lA)(l) of The Representation of People Act,1976.

he is found guilty of a corrupt or illegal practice under any law for the time being in force,unless a period of five years has elapsed from the date on which that order takes effect; orArticle 8D(2)-q of The Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002.

he is for the time being disqualified from being elected or chosen as a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) or of a Provincial Assembly under any law for the time being in force.

Above quoted provisions clearly provide that a person who has been disqualified from beingelected under any law for the time being in force will be disqualified from contesting the elections.As the petitioner was disqualified by virtue of proviso to Section 15 of NAB Ordinance read withSection 25 of said Ordinance, therefore, we; are of the considered view that his nomination papersfrom all the three constituencies were rightly rejected by the respective Returning Officers. We findno jurisdictional defect in the decision of Election Tribunal whereby appeals filed by petitioner weredismissed.

As regards the arguments of learned counsel that the nomination papers of petitioner wererejected on the basis of letter dated 09.02.2002, which was later on cancelled by another letterdated 12.6.2002, are concerned, it is suffice to observe that the petitioner was disqualified by virtueof Section-15 of NAB Ordinance, as such, it would not matter whether the said letter was cancelledor otherwise. Moreover, careful perusal of subsequent letter shows that it relates only to taking ofloan, financial assistance etc from banks and has no bearing on the other disqualification, which aperson has earned by virtue of NAB Ordinance. The said letter is reproduced hereunder:—

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S SECRETARIATNATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU,

ISLAMABAD.

SUBJECT: PROVISION NOF PLEA-BARGAIN RECORD TO GOVERNOR, STATE BANK OFPAKISTAN.

REFERENCE: a) NAB’s H.Q. U.O.No.7 (616)/2001-ADDI&M-4, Dated the 9th FEBRUARY, 2002.b) CE’S SECT: U.O.No.1-1/SO(a-1)/2002/628, dated 25.2.2002.

The undersigned is directed to inform that list of 105 individuals earlier forwarded vide abovequoted letters for appropriate action (to debar them to take any loan/advances from any Bankor Financial institution for a period of ten years may be treated as cancelled.


Fresh list of 23 individuals (Annex) wherein Accountability court has debarred them fromtaking loan/advances from any bank or financial institution for a period of 10 years is beingforwarded for appropriate action to comply with the provision of respective Section of NABOrdinance.

Inconvenience is regretted please.

Sd/-Capt: (R ) Basharat Ahmed,PN.

Additional Director (IM-1)Phone 9208620.

It was also contended that the beneficiary of contract for construction of Labour Colony wasBela Builders, owned by brother of petitioner, as such, he can not be held responsible for his deeds.First of all it would be suffice to observe that it involves factual controversy which cannot be lookedinto in Writ jurisdiction. Secondly, under NAB Ordinance “corrupt practice” has been used in awider term. It not only includes pecuniary advantage gained by spouse or dependants but also byany other person. The petitioner was arrested under the said charge and he accepted the charge byentering into plea of bargaining, as such, this ground is not available to him.

Up-shot of above discussion is that we find no merit in the present petitions and same aredismissed accordingly.

Announced in open CourtToday on 19 Sept: 2002.

Sd.JUDGE.

Sd.CHIEF JUSTICE.

Sd.JUDGE.

3.2 Nadia Mehreen v. Selection Committee for Admission to 1st yearM.B.B.S. Bolan Medical College, Sessions 2002-2003 throughChairman Public Service Commission, Quetta and & 3 others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA.Constitutional Petition No. 481/2003.

Date of hearing 28.10.2003Petitioner by M r. H. Shakil Ahmed, Advocate

Respondents No.1 to 3 by Mr. Salahuddin Mengal, A.G.Respondent No.4 by Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi, Advocate

JUDGEMENT

RAJA FAYYAZ AHMAD, C.J :-Following reliefs have been claimed in this ConstitutionalPetition:—

a) That the decision of the Selection Committee, whereby the admission has been declined to thepetitioner, is illegal, void, discriminatory and in excess of authority and of no legal effect.


b) That the petitioner being eligible in all respect is entitled to admission in 1st year M.B.B.S BolanMedical College Session 2002-03 and the official respondents be directed to grant admission tothe petitioner, accordingly.

c) Any other order as may be deemed fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case may alsobe awarded in the interest of justice.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and respondent No.4 besides other candidatesapplied for admission in the first year M.B.B.S Class of Balon Medical College, Quetta, AcademicSession 2002-03, against six seats reserved for District Khuzdar on merit basis. The petitioner andthe respondent No.4 appeared in the entry test alongwith the other candidates and as per merit listassigned by the college authorities the petitioner was placed at serial No.4 of the merit list, whereas;the respondent No.4 (Miss Khalida Usman) was at serial No.7 of the merit list filed as annexure-Ato the Constitutional Petition. Vide advertisement published in the ‘Daily Jang’ Quetta (Urdu)dated 27.6.2003 issued by the Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta the candidates from districtKhuzdar; were informed about the date of interview to be held in the office of DCO, Khuzdar on14.7.2003 at 9:30 a.m by the Selection Committee and that the Selection Committee will hold itsmeeting for the final selection of the candidates in the DCO’s office at Quetta on 21.7.2003 (Monday)at 10:00 a.m. Also, as per note inserted/appended below the advertisement, all the candidates wereinformed that they should bring along their original testimonials including the acknowledgementreceipt.

3. The case of the petitioner as set up in the Constitutional Petition is that she fell sick andremained admitted in the WAPDA hospital from 11.7.2003 to 13.7.2003, and; on 14.7.2003 whenshe alongwith her father reported at Khuzdar for verification of documents, they were informed thatinterview has already been conducted on 12.7.2003 and she was further informed by the authoritiesof the Selection Committee that the change in the date of interview was notified on 4.7.2003,but on account of eruption of law and order situation, curfew was imposed therefore, she had nochance to read the newspaper of the said date and remained ignorant of the same, whereas; herfather remained hospitalized from 20.7.2003 to 21.7.2003 in Akram Hospital, Quetta. However; thepetitioner stated to have reported in the final proceedings of the Selection Committee on 21.7.2003and submitted application dated 14.7.2003 to the official of the Bolan Medical College, but wasnot allowed to appear before the Selection Committee to clarify her position and she was informedthat her application has already been rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner claims to have made arepresentation through an application dated 28.7.2003.

It has been contended in the petition that the Selection Committee in its meeting held on21.8.2003 considered the application filed by her father, but the same was rejected on the groundthat she should have informed to the Selection Committee, which omitted to take note of the factthat there was a change in the interview date.

4. Photostat copy of the publication about the change in the date of interview for districts Kalat,Khuzdar, Kharan, Lasbela, Mastung and Awaran for admission in the first year M.B.B.S Class ofBolan Medical College and first year B.D.S Course, as notified by the Principal, Bolan MedicalCollege was published in ‘Daily Jang’ Quetta on 4.7.2003 for the information of the candidates ofthese districts that interviews for the Academic Session 2002-23 will be scheduled to be held on14.7.2003, instead; will be held on 12.7.2003 at 9:30 a.m in the office of DCO, Khuzdar and thecandidates were required to bring their along original testimonials.

5. The Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College admittedly assembled in the DCO’s office,Khuzdar on 12.7.2003 at 9:30 a.m, which interviewed the candidates, who appeared before it andfinal meeting of the Selection Committee as it appears from the copy of the minutes of the meetingannexed with the memo: of Constitutional Petition was held at Quetta on 21.7.2003 in the DCO’s


office, Quetta for the Academic Session 2002-03 in which the application of the petitioner foradmission was rejected after recording its findings/decision as under:—

KHUZDARMiss Nadia Mehreen Baloch D/O Abdul Rauf

She failed to appear before the Selection Committee for interview on 12.7.2003 at Khuz-dar and she did not submit any application for her absence.

The Selection Committee waited for her to appear for the interview and later directedthe D.C.O, Khuzdar that if she comes or submit an application on the same day, itshould be forwarded to the Committee.

She was absent during the interview and did not submit any application on the dayof interview at Khuzdar. Hence her application is rejected by the Selection Committeeunder para No.49 of the Prospectus for the Academic Session, 2002-2003.

5. Copy of the minutes of meeting of the Selection Committee held in the office of the Chairman,Balochistan Public Service Commission, Quetta on 21.8.2003 has also been filed with the memo: ofConstitutional Petition, which indicates that the Selection Committee deliberated upon the cases ofa few candidates including that of the petitioner in respect whereof application dated 28.7.2003 wasmoved to the Chairman, Selection Committee by the father of the petitioner was brought underconsideration in which the decision earlier taken by the Selection Committee, noted above, wasmaintained. The observations so recorded in this meeting are reproduced herein below:—

1. Mr. Abdul Rauf Baloch father of Miss Nadia Mehreen

Mr. Abdul Rauf has submitted an application dated 28.7.2003 (along with Medicalcertificate), in which he has requested that the admission case of his daughter may bere-considered on humanitarian grounds, so that she is not deprived if her legitimate right.The Selection Committee rejected her application under para No.49 of the Prospectus,as she did not appear before the Selection Committee for interview at Khuzdar on12.7.2003.

The Selection Committee maintained its previous decision with the observation that ifMiss Nadia was sick at the time of interview at Khuzdar, she should have informed theSelection committee through an application or any other source as the interview wasbeing held in her native district.

7. The respondent No.3 (Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta) by means of his writtenstatement seriously contested the Constitutional Petition on the grounds mentioned therein andurged during the course of arguments by the learned A.G on his behalf.

8. The petitioner feeling aggrieved of the decision taken by the Selection Committee refusing togrant admission in the M.B.B.S Class of Bolan Medical College, Quetta and the subsequent order/decision taken by the Selection Committee, rejecting her application to be reconsidered on meritsfor admission applied for in view of the representation made by her father on the ground of herfailure to appear in the interview held on 12.7.2003 at Khuzdar in the DCO’s office without dueconsideration of the reasons and grounds urged in the application being unjust, unfair and illegalas well as discriminatory and resulting into the grant of admission to the respondent No.4, haspreferred the instant Constitutional Petition wherein the reliefs noted above in para No.1 suprahave been claimed.


9. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.G for the official respondents and thelearned counsel for the respondent No.4 have been heard at length. Mr. H. Shakil Ahmed contendedthat rejection of the candidature of the petitioner on account of her nonappearance on the datefixed for the interviews of the candidates was explained on record through documentary evidenceand particularly in the identical circumstances nonappearance of a candidate namely Miss ZakiaKhoso was condoned by the Selection Committee, renders the decision and the subsequent orderpassed by the Selection Committee as illegal, violative of the sprit of the relevant paragraph ofthe prospectus, as well as discriminatory, moreover; as there was no objection by any candidateor otherwise against her candidature, therefore, in all fairness in the given facts and circumstancesof the case she being at serial No.4 of the merit list was entitled for the admission applied for asagainst the private respondent. The learned counsel vehemently contended that since at the timeof final selection of the candidates held at Quetta on 21.7.2003, the petitioner appeared before theSelection Committee but was interviewed, therefore, the object of paragraph-49 of the admissionpolicy for all intents and purposes stood achieved including the explanation given by her about herfailure to appear for interview on the scheduled date at Khuzdar by no stretch chould have resultedinto nonsuiting her and similarly; the deliberations of the Selection Committee held on 21.8.2003 onthe representation made by the father of the petitioner meant primarily for review of cases broughtbefore it in the light of the individual grievances of the candidates, urged and explained by thepetitioner ought to have been accepted, but the Selection Committee illegally passed the impugnedorders, which are illegal, void and in excess of the authority vested in it, consequently; the samemay be declared to be of no legal effect, inasmuch as; the impugned decisions taken by the SelectionCommittee are neither reasonable nor judicious in view of the directory nature of the para-49 ofprospectus, which does not even provide any penal consequences. Mr. H. Shakil Ahmed argued thatabrupt change in the date of the interview also caused serious prejudice to the petitioner, whichcould not come to the notice of the petitioner in time, who bona fidely on 14.7.2003 alongwithher father appeared for interview in the office of the DCO, Khuzdar at the given time and cameto know that the interviews were already held by the Selection Committee on 12.7.2003, hence; insuch view of the matter her failure to appear on the changed date deserved to be entertained andcondoned, particularly for the reason explained in the application moved by her and the subsequentrepresentation to have not resulted in nonsuiting her. The learned counsel further submitted thatno final decision by the Selection Committee was taken on the date of interview held on 12.7.2003,rather; the final Selection was made by the Committee in its meeting held on 21.7.2003 in whichthe reasons of failure of the petitioner were duly explained y means of application and thus; therewas no justification on the part of the Selection Committee to have not condoned the default.Mr. H. Shakil Ahmed further submitted that no marks are allocated for interview, which is meantonly for scrutiny of original testimonials and to dispose of objections, if any; raised or coming tothe knowledge of the Selection Committee in respect of the candidature of a candidate, hence;nonappearance or failure of a candidate to appear on the scheduled date for interview, who beforefinal Selection if duly explained circumstances beyond control or prevented by sufficient cause toappear in interview will not be fatal for his selection on merit, therefore, the petitioner is entitledto get admission applied for as per merit assigned to her.

10. The learned A.G contended that the selection made by the Selection Committee and therejection of the subsequent representation made by the petitioner’s father in view of the groundsand reasons found favour with the Selection Committee in its final meeting and deliberations ofthe Selection Committee made on 21.8.2003 in view of peculiar circumstances of the case read withparagraph-49 of the prospectus of the Bolan Medical College, are not open to any interferenceand exception is not amenable to the extraordinary discretionary powers vesting in the Court.According to the learned A.G, the Selection Committee appropriately exercised its powers and the


subsequent discretion on sound grounds in the given facts and circumstances of the case, inasmuchas; the explanation offered in the application and the subsequent representation was afterthoughtand belated nor the petitioner ever appeared before the Selection Committee and the plea thatthe petitioner was precluded or prevented by any sufficient cause was to the notice of the SelectionCommittee by making application promptly explaining/giving reasons for condonation of her owndefault in absence whereof in routine or in a mechanical way the same cannot be brushed asidelightly. According to the learned A.G the impugned decisions taken by the Selection Committeewere taken in accordance with the admission policy and non-adherence to the Rule will result infrustrating the object of relevant paragraph of the prospectus, and secondly; that the candidateswill not care and be serious to appear on scheduled dates for interview except in a case wherea candidate promptly shows sufficient cause which prevented him to appear for interview on thescheduled date, but such exception lacks in the instant case. The learned A.G submitted that thecase of Miss Zakia Khoso was distinguishable on the facts, as she provided and furnished to thesatisfaction of the Selection Committee with the substantial cause preventing her to be capable toappear before the Selection Committee for interview on the fixed date, found to be sufficient onjustifiable basis by the Committee to condone the default, hence; quoting of the instance having nobearing in the instant case and refusal by the Committee to condone the default on the part of thepetitioner to appear for interview on the scheduled date cannot be termed as discriminatory on thepart of the Selection Committee.

11. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 contended that inthe given facts and circumstances of the case nonappearance/failure on the part of the petitioner toappear for interview at Khuzdar on the altered date duly notified in the newspaper well within time;appears to be not due to any inevitable reason and the documents filed in support thereof in respectof her alleged sickness and of her father on the subsequent dates was an afterthought attempt tocreate justification of her nonappearance before the Selection Committee. According to the learnedcounsel since the private respondent has been granted admission on merit as per assigned merits ofthe candidates, therefore, she cannot be deprived of her admission in the college merely because ofan afterthought attempts made to create justification seeking for condonation of the default on thepart of the petitioner to appear in the interview held on 12.7.2003 in the DCO’s office at Khuzdar. Hefurther contended that till date of the final meeting of the Selection Committee held on 21.7.2003,the petitioner did not submit any application with regard to her stated explanation of sickness,which allegedly precluded her to appear in the interview, rather; she for the first time submittedapplication in the office of the Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quetta on 23.7.2003 received in theoffice of the principal on the same date but in order to show that she promptly made applicationinstead of mentioning the actual date of the application, she deliberately and incorrectly insertedthe date of application as 14.7.2003 instead of 23.7.2003 when it was actually moved in the officeof the Principal of the College and such fact is quite evident from the endorsement made on thecopy of the application by the dispatcher of the college to the effect that the same was received on23.7.2003 (filed with the memo: of the Constitutional Petition). According to the learned counsel;the petitioner in fact did not physically appear even before the Selection Committee in its finalmeeting held on 21.7.2003 nor she made appearance before the Selection Committee in its meetingheld on 28.7.2003 in view of the representation made by her father and other candidates, scheduledfor review of cases relating to admissions in first M.B.B.S Class Academic Session 2002-03, hence;the contention raised by the petitioner’s learned counsel that the object, intents and purposes ofinterview stood achieved when she physically appeared in person for the scrutiny of her originaltestimonials and for providing explanation with regard to her failure to appear on the scheduleddate for interview at Khuzdar, but she was not permitted to be interviewed or to physically appearon 21.7.2003 are misconceived and baseless. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi, adopted the arguments


put forth by the learned A.G as regards physical appearance of a candidate on the date fixed forinterview, the object and purposes of paragraph-49 of the prospectus are concerned including thealleged discriminatory treatment meted out to the petitioner and; in support thereof he placed onrecord Photostat copy of the judgement passed by the Division Bench of this Court in ConstitutionalPetition No.186/2001 in the case of Syed Suleman Shah Vs. Principal, Bolan medical College andothers, in which it was held that individual notices were not required to be issued for interview asper relevant paras of the prospectus, rather; publication made in ‘Daily Jang’ Quetta relating tothe programme of Selection Committee for holding of the interviews of the candidates at DistrictHeadquarters was brought on record by the petitioner himself and that the Selection Committeeunder para-30 of the prospectus is competent to see and inquire as to whether a candidate actuallybelongs to the district, of which he has produced local/domicile certificate and for such reason alonephysical presence of the candidate was made compulsory. It was also observed that the wisdom ofthe Rule cannot be brought under challenge, otherwise there was no need to constitute SelectionCommittee, headed by the Chairman, Public Service Commission nor the petitioner has sought forrelief that para No.47 of the prospectus be struck down and in any case; the same was held to benot in violative of Article-22 (4) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Moreover;in the said judgement reverting to the ground of discrimination, it was observed that the privaterespondent whose admission was challenged on the ground that she did not appear for interviewbefore the Selection Committee on the scheduled date, it was noted that she subsequently appearedbefore the Selection Committee on the third day from the date of the scheduled interview andher request for interview was allowed by the Selection Committee and thus; the honourable Courtconcluded that the respondent whose admission was assailed on account of her default to appearfor interview that she not only approached the Selection Committee at the time of final meetingheld for selection of candidates, but was interviewed. Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi lastly submittedthat the Selection Committee appropriately in the lawful exercise of powers vesting in it rejectedthe candidature of petitioner on account of her failure to appear for interview, is also in accord withthe relevant para of the admission policy, which for plausible reasons and valid basis rejected theapplication submitted by the petitioner after the date of final selection and similarly appropriatelyit did not review its earlier decision for being not open to any exception.

12. The contentions put forth on behalf of the parties’ learned counsel and the learned A.G,who appeared for the official respondents, have been considered in the light of the documentsannexed with the memo: of Constitutional Petition and the impugned orders passed by the SelectionCommittee; we, have carefully perused para-49 of the Prospectus and the judgement passed bythe Division Bench of this Court in Constitutional Petition No.186/2001 referred to by the learnedcounsel for the private respondent. The admitted feature of the case is that as per notice published in‘Daily Jang’ Quetta (Urdu) dated 27.6.2003 issued by the Principal, Bolan Medical College, Quettathe candidates from District Khuzdar, Kalat, Kharan, Lasbela and Awaran were required to appearfor interview before the Selection Committee seeking for admission in the first year M.B.B.S Courseand first year B.D.S Course on 14.7.2003 at 9:30 a.m in DCO’s office, Khuzdar and further that theSelection Committee will hold its final meeting for the selection of the candidates in the DCO’s officeat Quetta on 21.7.2003 (Monday) at 9:00 a.m. They were also informed by means of this notice thatthe candidates should bring along their original testimonials including acknowledgement receipt. Ithas been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner fell sick and remained admittedin the WAPDA hospital from 11.7.2003 to 13.7.2003, and; on 14.7.2003 when she alongwith herfather reported at Khuzdar for verification of documents they were informed that interviews havealready been conducted on 12.7.2003 and she was further informed by the authorities of the SelectionCommittee that the change in the date of interview was notified on 4.7.2003 in the newspaper, but onaccount of eruption of law and order situation, curfew was imposed hence; she had no chance to read


the newspaper of the said date and remained ignorant of the same. Vide notice published in ‘DailyJang, Quetta dated 4.7.2003, photostat copy whereof has been filed with the memo: of petition; thecandidates, who had applied for admission for Academic Session 2002-03 in Bolan Medical Collegefrom Districts Kalat, Khuzdar, Kharan, Lasbela, Mastung and Awaran were informed that theirinterviews scheduled to be held on 14.7.2003 will now to be held on 12.7.2003, accordingly; all thecandidates from these districts were informed by means of the said notice to appear on 12.7.2003at 9:30 a.m in the office of DCO, Khuzdar and to bring along their original testimonials. On thisdate, admitted position is that the petitioner did not appear before the Selection Committee atKhuzdar. In respect of the plea of her illness photostat copy of the medical certificate issued by theMedical Superintendent, WAPDA hospital, Quetta dated 11.7.2003 has been filed with the memo:of Constitutional Petition, issued on a prescribed proforma meant for the officers in BPS-16 andabove, although; the petitioner was not an employee of the WAPDA, however; it shows that shewas suffering from Enteric Fever and Amebic Dysentery in the relevant column of the certificatefilled in by the concerned, which shows that she was recommended for three days leave with effectfrom 11.7.2003 to14.7.2003. No other document in support of the state of health of the petitionerand the medicine, if any; prescribed by the Dr. for the noted sickness of the petitioner has beenfiled nor produced during the course of arguments. Moreover; the medical certificate does not showthat she suffered from such sickness up-to 13.7.2003 and was hospitalized, rather; the stated state ofhealth of the petitioner as stood on 11.7.2003 has been noted in the medical certificate, whereas; inthe Constitutional Petition it was contended that she remained admitted in the WAPDA hospitalfrom 11.7.2003 to 13.7.2003, therefore, in absence of any supportive material it cannot be assumedthat she remained admitted in the WAPDA hospital from 11.7.2003 to 13.7.2003 nor it can besafely inferred that she without undergoing treatment for the Enteric Fever and Amebic Dysenteryabruptly with a bad state of health, as observed in the medical certificate, stood completely curedand she was able to treval to Khuzdar with her father where she statedly came to know afterhaving been informed that interviews had already been conducted on 12.7.2003 by the SelectionCommittee. It appears that the petitioner, whose father admittedly is posted as Executive Engineerin WAPDA was successful in procuring the medical certificate in favour of his daughter which inno way renders any support to her plea that she was hospitalized with effect from 11.7.2003 to13.7.2003. Next, it has been pleaded and contended that due to law and order situation, curfewwas imposed on account of which she remained ignorant of the subsequent notice published in‘Daily Jang’ Quetta about the change of the date of interview, also seems to be devoid of anysubstance, as no document or any other material has been produced or filed in support of such pleathat on 4th of July curfew was imposed in Quetta city where she ordinarily resides as per addressgiven in the title of the Constitutional Petition and thus; on account of the curfew she could notcome across the notice published in ‘Daily Jang’ Quetta on 4.7.2003. Even if it be assumed thatcurfew was imposed in Quetta city on the said date, the petitioner still was to show that it wasenforced/commenced at what hours; as newspapers ordinarily as a matter of common notice, aredistributed and become available in market at early hours of the morning, hence; such plea alsoremained unsubstantiated, benefit whereof ipso facto in view of these pleas cannot be extended topetitioner seeking for condonation of the default to appear for interview on 12.7.2003 before theSelection Committee at Khuzdar.

It is pertinent to note that in the initial notice published in the ‘Daily Jang’ Quetta on 27.6.2003pursuant to which the petitioner statedly appeared for interview at Khuzdar alongwith her fatheron 14.7.2003, it was specifically brought to the notice of the candidates that final meeting of theSelection Committee will be held at Quetta on 21.7.2003 in the DCO’s office, Quetta and minutesof the meeting of the Selection Committee held on the said date in respect of admissions in BolanMedical College, Quetta for Academic Session 2002-03 has also been filed with the memo: of petition


and thus; according to the petitioner’s own showing she was well aware that the final meeting forthe selection of the candidates was to be held on 21.7.2003, but till such date she did not submitany application to the Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College explaining her position in viewof the pleas taken in this petition. She for the first time submitted an application in the office of thePrincipal, Bolan Medical College (respondent No.3) on 23.7.2003 as it appears from the copy of theapplication filed with the petition containing official stamp and signature of the receipt clerk of theoffice of the principal containing endorsement to such effect, whereas; the date on the application hasbeen inserted as 14.7.2003, which obviously cannot be treated as the date on which it was received inthe office of the principal. In this application as well, it was contended that she was hospitalized atQuetta from 11.7.2003 to 13.7.2003, but such plea as hereinabove discussed apparently is without anysubstance, and secondly; request was made in the application that her case on medical grounds beconsidered for admission in the first year M.B.B.S Class, Academic Session 2002-03. In the minutes ofmeeting of the Selection Committee held on 21.7.2003 it was specifically observed by the SelectionCommittee that the petitioner failed to appear before the Selection Committee for interview on12.7.2003 at Khuzdar and she did not submit any application about her absence, however; theSelection Committee waited for her for the interview and latter directed the DCO, Khuzdar thatif the candidates comes or submits an application on the same date it should be forwarded to theCommittee thus; in these circumstances it was concluded by the Selection Committee that as she wasabsent from interview and did not submit any application on the day of interview at Khuzdar, hence;her application for admission in the M.B.B.S first year in Bolan Medical College was rejected underpara-49 of the prospectus for the Academic Session 2002-03, to which no exception can be taken forthe simple reason that the petitioner did not submit any application till the date of final meeting ofthe Selection Committee, i.e 21.7.2003. Hence; application submitted in the office of the Principal,Bolan Medical College on 23.7.2003 subsequent to the abovesiad date could not have been broughtunder consideration, subsequently; her father on 28.7.2003 submitted an application for review of thedecision taken by the Selection Committee on 21.7.2003 to the Chairman, Balochistan Public ServiceCommission/Chairman, Selection Committee, Bolan Medical College, Quetta. Reiterating that herdaughter (petitioner) fell sick and remained hospitalized from 11.7.2003 to 13.7.2003 in WAPDAhospital, Quetta and on 14.7.2003 when they reported at Khuzdar for verification of documents theywere told that the interview has already been conducted on 12.7.2003, but the change in the dateof interview notified in the only newspaper on 4.7.2003 which did not come to their hands due toQuetta incident and they remained ignorant of the change brought in with regard to the interviewdate, and; moreover; he also remained hospitalized from 20.7.2001 to 21.7.2003 in Akram hospital,Quetta, however; she stated to have reported in the final proceedings of the Selection Committeedated 21.7.2003 held at Quetta and she also handed over copy of application dated 14.7.2003 to Mr.Naeem Kasi of Bolan Medical College, but was not allowed to appear before the committee to clarifyher position and she was told by the said official that her application has already been rejected. Theminutes of the meeting referred to above, copy whereof has been filed with the memo: of petitiondoes not indicate that the petitioner did appear before the Selection Committee on 21.7.2003 forverification of her original testimonials and to clarify her position. Therefore, in absence of anysupportive material it cannot be assumed that she appeared before the Committee on the aforesaiddate, but was not allowed by the Selection Committee to explain her position for having failed toappear on 12.7.2003 for interview. Secondly; had it been so; there was no occasion for the petitionerto have obtained acknowledgement of receipt of her application on 23.7.2003 from the receipt Clerkof the office of Principal of Bolan Medical College. No document in support of the petitioner’sfather having been hospitalized from 20.7.2003 to 21.7.2003 in Akram Hospital, Quetta has beenproduced nor the same appears to be relevant in the matter. The fact remains that on 28.7.2003 thepetitioner’s father filed a review application before the Chairman, Selection Committee, which was


considered by the Selection Committee, as evident from the copy of the minutes of the SelectionCommittee held in the office of the Chairman of Balochistan Public Service Commission at Quettaand for reasons mentioned in the minutes of meeting; the Selection Committee refused to reviewits earlier decision which are neither fanciful, arbitrary, misconceived nor suffered from any legalinfirmity, in the given facts and circumstances of the case in view of the relevant paras of theprospectus of the College for the Academic Session 2002-03 and dealt with in the judgement passedby the Division Bench of this Court in C.P No.186/2001 wherein it was held that individual noticesas per admission policy are not required to be issued for interview, rather; publication made in thenewspaper relating to the programme of the Selection Committee for holding of the interviews ofthe candidates at District Headquarters was perfectly valid within the meaning of relevant paraof prospectus and that the Selection Committee is competent to see and inquire as to whether acandidate actually belongs to the District of which he has produced local/domicile certificate andfor such reason alone physical presence of a candidate was made compulsory, moreover; wisdomof the Rule cannot been brought under challenge otherwise there was no need to constitute theSelection Committee, headed by the Chairman, Balochistan Public Service Commission as well asthe relevant para of prospectus requiring physical presence of a candidate was also held to be not inviolative of Article-22 (4) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, moreover; in the saidjudgement reverting to the ground of discrimination it was observed that the private respondent,whose admission in first year M.B.B.S Class was brought under challenge on the ground that she didnot appear for interview before Selection Committee on the schedule date, the honourable DivisionBench noted that she subsequently; appeared before the Selection Committee on the third day fromthe date of the scheduled interview and her request was allowed by the Selection Committee, whonot only before the date of final Selection approached the Selection Committee but also appearedbefore it at the time of final selection of the candidates. The contention that discrimination hasbeen meted out to the petitioner as in identical circumstances, nonappearance of a candidate namelyMiss Zakia Khoso was condoned by the Selection Committee. It may be seen that facts relatingto these two cases are quite distinguishable except to the extent that they each failed to appearon the scheduled date for interview. In the case of Miss Zakia Khoso, whose default in appearancebefore the Selection Committee was condoned, because her father promptly without loss of timeapproached to the Selection Committee and; brought to its notice that due to severe damage of theBibi Nani Bridge on account of rain flood in Bolan, his said daughter was rendered in capable toappear for interview before the Selection Committee and thus; she was permitted to appear beforethe Selection Committee on the final date of meeting already notified for the selection of candidates,accordingly; she was interviewed and the Selection Committee after its having been satisfied with theexplanation and the genuineness of the inevitable event condoned the default and she was selectedon merits to be entitled for admission in the first year class of Bolan Medical College. In the instantcase as hereinabove mentioned neither the petitioner nor her father promptly approached to theSelection Committee by explaining circumstances on account of which the petitioner stated to havebeen precluded to appear on the fixed date for interview before the Selection Committee, but forthe first time after the date of the final meeting, application was submitted by the petitioner inthe office of the Principal, Bolan Medical College on 23.7.2003 and secondly; the grounds on whichcondonation of the default in appearance before the Committee was sought for, also for reasonsmentioned hereinabove are devoid of any substance, hence; in our considered view failure on thepart of the petitioner to appear for interview on the scheduled date cannot be condoned in routineor in a mechanical way unless the circumstances which prevented the petitioner to be physicallypresent before the Selection Committee brought to the notice of the Selection Committee promptlyas well as to have appeared at least before the Committee on the date fixed for final meeting alreadynotified in the first notice published in the newspaper referred to in the memo: of Constitutional


Petition. All the more in the given facts and circumstances of the case, it was obligatory on the partof the petitioner even if it be assumed that she had no knowledge that the date of interview initiallynotified was antedated to 12.7.2003 instead of 14.7.2003, she should have without loss of time couldhave easily brought the factors resulting into her nonappearance on the date of interview to thenotice of the Selection Committee by fax, telegram etc: but she appears to have not cared nor actedwith due diligence, therefore, the petitioner at a belated stage and more particularly for the reasonthat the other candidate standing on merit, who had appeared for interview, has been selected andgranted admission in the first year class of the college; cannot be permitted to take benefit of her ownwrongs nor the private respondent to be deprived of her legitimate right of admission accrued to heron account of failure of the petitioner to appear for interview and the subsequent lapses on her part.No doubt para-49 of the admission policy of the college, though; being mandatory in nature is notabsolutely inflexible in all circumstances, but it does have scope of flexibility in view of the principlesof fairness, reasonableness and wisdom embodied in its spirit to admit for an explanation to condonedefault of a candidate if he was precluded or prevented by an act of God or any other sufficientcause to be physically present before the Selection Committee for interview on the particular dateand such factors are promptly and without loss of any further time are brought to the notice ofthe Selection Committee on or prior to the date of final meeting of the Selection Committee, fallswithin the scope of its inherent powers to reconsider and to satisfy itself as to the genuineness, andthe explanation, if any; offered by a candidate to condone the default or otherwise, as the case maybe; unless it is shown that the powers and exercise of authority so vested in the Committee havebeen exercised arbitrarily or fancifully, which in our estimation in the instant case is lacking, as theSelection Committee applied its mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and did not find itfit to condone the default, therefore; her case even does not fall within the exception. Undoubtedly;no marks have been allocated for a candidate, who appears before the Selection Committee forinterview nor does the physical appearance before the Committee, provides any criteria to grantadmission to a candidate but all the same, in view of the scheme and admission policy, physicalappearance of a candidate for interview is not without any ratio and logic, as on such date theSelection committee has to scrutinize the original testimonials of candidates and satisfy itself aboutthe candidates to be bona fide residents i.e local/domicile of the districts of which they have appliedfor admission on merits against the reserved seats of the districts or otherwise, as well as; to makefurther inquiry if need be as regards genuineness, validity of a local/domicile certificate is concerned,hence; in such view of the matter, the provisions of para-49 of the prospectus are mandatory innature, else; it would be difficult for the Selection Committee to discharge its functions objectivelyand on the other hand, the candidates at their option will approach to the committee for interviewgiving various reasons to be interviewed on the date of final meeting of the Committee and beforethat which obviously has to result in jeopertizing the whole scheme of the admission policy meantfor selection of the candidates. No document or other material has been filed or produced beforethis court indicating that the petitioner did appear or approach to the Selection Committee on thedate of its final meeting for interview and to explain her position, hence; as contended before usby the petitioner’s learned counsel that the intent and purpose of the para-49 of Prospectus stoodfully complied with, is also without any substance for the reason, as according to the petitioner’sown showing for the first time application was delivered in the office of the Principal on 23.7.2003filed as annexure to the Constitutional Petition dealt with hereinabove and in this application evenit was not alleged that she appeared and approached to the Selection Committee on the date of itsfinal meeting held on 21.7.2003, therefore, it cannot be said that she approached to the Committeeon the aforesaid date.


Thus, for the above reasons this Constitutional Petition, being without merits and devoid of anysubstance, is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Announced on 11 Novem-ber, 2003.

Sd.CHIEF JUSTICE.

Sd.JUDGE.

3.3 Bashir Ahmed & 2 others v. Hussain


Civil Revision Petition No. 347/2001.

Date of hearing 11th April, 2003Petitioner by Bashir Ahmed and 2 others by Mr. Amanullah, Kanrani, Advocate.

Respondents Hussain by Mr. Naeem Akhtar, Advocate.

Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, C.J.—This Civil Revision under Section 115 CPC has been directedagainst judgment and decree dated 27.4.2000 passed by the learned Qazi Mashkey whereby thesuit filed by the respondent against the petitioners for declaration and possession was decreed inhis favour and against the appellate judgment/decree dated 30.10.2001 whereby the appeal filed bythe petitioners against the decree of the Qazi Court has been dismissed by maintaining the decreepassed by the learned Qazi Mashkey as well as holding the appeal filed by the petitioners as barredby time.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent instituted suit for declaration and ejectmentof the petitioners under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act in respect of landed property, describedin para No.1 of the plaint in the court of Qazi Mashkey on the stated averments that i) Kherowalland on which machine has been installed was declared to be the exclusive property of the father ofthe respondent/plaintiff, ii) Land Chail belongs to and vests in both the parties in equal shares and;iii) Land known as Saktareeb shall vest and belong to both the parties in equal shares (one and halfshare) each. It has further been explained in the para No.2 of the suit that one half of the propertydescribed in para No.1 of the plaint was initially purchased by one Baran who sold the same to oneShikari from whom the same was purchased by the respondent/plaintiff and since then it remainedin the cultivating possession of the father of the plaintiff, who used to deliver Haq-e-Malikana to thepetitioners/defendants as per their entitlement and during this period a dispute arose between theparties which ultimately; was resolved by virtue of the verdict of the Court, made in the year 1989,pursuant to which the cultivated and the uncultivated lands were partitioned between the partiesand since then both the parties remained in the undisturbed and peaceful cultivating possession oftheir respective lands.

Further the case of the respondent/plaintiff was that about two months prior to the institution ofthe suit on the instigation of other persons, the petitioners on gunpoint forcibly took over possessionof the lands of the respondent/plaintiff and the machine installed on his land was removed anddismantled. On these averments suit under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act for declaration,possession and injunction was instituted wherein the following reliefs were claimed:—


�� ! "# $� ��% �� & �

' (��)* !)*� � �+�� !� ,� �� !)*�-��./� ��

��0�� 1 �$ �23�%�% �-.�� 4 �5 ��% �� +�� !� 6��/ �� ! "# $� 7% �� & ��' ! "# $� �� !8��)* !� �� !8 !93 6��/ �� & !)*

� :;<�=)* !93 � �+�� -/ �$�� (�� 6��/ �� ! "# $� 7% �� & >�' !)*� ?��@A� �� ! "9B !� � :;<�)*

�� C� �� D � �� ! "# �� -�� EF#G� )* � �)*�H +�I� �(�� >� �23�%�% �J��% �� & %

' ! "# $� �"0 ��B% 6��/

3. The petitioners/defendants by means of their written statement dated 29.3.2000 contestedthe suit and repudiated the claim of the respondent on various grounds of law and facts. Mainly itwas contended in the written statement that lands known as Kherowal has not been described by itscorrect boundaries nor the plaintiff has shown the extent of his entitlement in respect of Kherowallands and the claim as regards Kherowal lands has been ambiguously made whereas; the lands knownas Chail and Saktareeb are barren, which were never brought in cultivation nor any Lath was evererected on these lands. The claim of the plaintiff in respect of these lands was specifically repudiatedon the ground that the same is the exclusive inherited property of the defendants/petitioners as wellas the claim of the plaintiff that he purchased the suit property from one Shikari was also seriouslycontested on the ground that the stated vendor had no legal authority nor vested with any legalcharacter to sale the property vesting in the defendants.

4. Out of pleadings of the parties, the learned Qazi Mashkey framed the following issues:—

K !)* C �D;�D �-L�% M<� �� NO�� !)*

�-<��/� �� PB L ��D �2 �Q�� E/5�� !� � ��)*�-B�� RG4S4 �/ �+�� NTO

K !)* U �� V+�I (�� D �� W:X �B�L�� 2 �Q�� YZ*�D �B�L�� 2 �Q��

(�� C� U �� ' !)*�-��./� �:0�� 6Z*[�/ �� 5\�� C��<�� N]O

K� ^Z*�_ �+� �"0��

5. The respondent/plaintiff in support of his case and in the light of issues produced eight wit-nesses as well as tendered in evidence the judgment and decree dated 17.6.1989 and the compromisedeed of even date respectively marked as Ex. P/A, Ex. P/B and Ex. P/C. Also, the decision ren-dered by Sardar Rustam Khan dated 22.1.2000 was tendered in evidence by the respondent beforethe Qazi Court, but copies of these documents except the statement of few witnesses have not beenannexed with the memo: of revision petition nor names of the witnesses produced at the trial havebeen mentioned in the revision petition.

The petitioners/defendants adduced fourteen witnesses in support of their case as well as ten-dered in evidence copy of the criminal complaint dated 17.1.1999, Dastbardarinama dated 1.11.1999,copy of application, dated 30.10.1999 and copy of compromise deed dated 11.11.1999 respectivelymarked as Ex. D/A to Ex. D/D. They also produced the decision of Sardarzada Ali Haider Muham-mad Hassni dated 19.10.1999, but copies of these documents have not been filed with the memo: ofCivil Revision Petition.

After close of the parties case and hearing them the learned Qazi Mashkey vide judgment/decreedated 27.4.2000 decreed the suit in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. The petitioners/defendants


feeling himself dis-satisfied with the decree of the Qazi Court filed Civil Revision Petition No.148/2000 before this Court on 21.6.2000, which was heard on 4.10.2001 and by means of order ofeven date memo: of Civil Revision Petition alongwith the annexures and court fees was directed tobe returned to the petitioners or to their learned counsel after retaining photostat copies for recordenabling them to file appeal in the court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora subject to all just exceptions.For convenience and reference to the order passed by this court in Civil Revision No.148/2000,reproduced in extenso herein below.

4.10.2001 Mr. Amanullah Kanrani, Advocate. M/S Naeem Aktar & M. Qahir Shah,Advocates.

At the very outset learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Naeem Akhtar contended thatalthough in the suit instituted by the respondent Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act wasmentioned, but the suit related to the reliefs of declaration, injunction and possession and insubstance in view of the averments as contained in the plaint, it was not a suit simplicitorfor possession within the purview of Section-9 of the Specific Relief Act which after trial wasdecreed as prayed for by the learned Qazi court, therefore, the decree was assailable only inappeal and not way of revision.

Mr. Amanullah Kanrani having gone through contents of the plaint, relief claimed in the suitand decree passed by the learned Qazi court conceded to the legal position that it was not asuit simplicitor for possession, therefore, such decree was amenable to appellate jurisdiction ofthe learned Majlis-e-Shoora and in that connection the petitioners were misled by the quotingof Section-9 of the Specific Relief Act in the title of the suit about which even reference wasmade by the Qazi Court in the impugned judgment/decree, hence; in such view of the matter,in the interest of justice, this revision petition and the court fee affixed on the memo: ofrevision petition be returned to the petitioners enabling them to file appeal in the learnedMajlis-e-Shoora/Appellate Court against the impugned decree.

Perusal of the contents of plaint and reliefs claimed therein abundantly show that the same wasnot simplicitor a suit for possession within the meaning of Section-9 of the Specific Relief Act,but in the title of the suit the petition writer who drafted the plaint appears to have wronglyquoted the suit as having been instituted under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act and wrongquoting of the Section will not in substance alter the nature of the suit in view of the reliefsclaimed therein and also the learned Qazi Court, without attending to the proposition incor-rectly treated the same as suit under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act its judgment/decree.Also, in view of the reliefs claimed in the suit decree in favour of the respondent was passed bylearned Qazi Court against which right of appeal is provided under the law, hence; revisionaljurisdiction of this court has wrongly been invoked, therefore, in such view of the matter as wellas in view of the above noted request made by Mr. Amanullah Kanrani memo of civil revisionalongwith annexures and court fee be returned to the petitioners or their learned counsel, afterretaining photostate copies on record of all these documents, enabling them to file appeal inthe court of Majlis-e-Shoora subject to all just exceptions. Order accordingly.

Parties are left to bear their own costs.

7. Pursuant to the above-mentioned order the petitioners/defendants preferred appeal on17.10.2001 in the Court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora, Khuzdar against the judgment and decreedated 27.4.2000 passed by the learned Qazi Mashkey. The learned Appellate Court after hearingthe parties vide judgment and decree dated 31.10.2001 dismissed the appeal of the petitionersas barred by time and upheld the decree impugned in appeal. The petitioners have assailed thejudgments/decrees respectively passed by the learned courts below in the instant Civil RevisionPetition.


8. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard Mr. Amanullah Kanrani submitted thatthe plaint was drafted by the petition-writer in the Mufassil, wrongly quoted the suit as having beenfiled under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, which does not effect the proceedings and trial ofthe case in substance as an ordinary suit declaration and possession of property for all intents andpurposes in view of the allegations of facts as well as the reliefs claimed in the suit, but the learnedtrial court specifically decreed the suit in favour of the respondent under Section-9 of the SpecificRelief Act, which misled the petitioners, who assailed the decree directly in the High Court by filingrevision petition. According to the learned counsel no party is to be prejudiced by an act of thecourt and in the instant case, the petitioners were misled by the terms of decree and thus; insteadof filing appeal against the decree of the trial court the same was assailed in the revision petitionand no sooner the petitioners realized that they had chosen the wrong forum; request was made forreturn of the memo: of revision petition, impugned judgment etc: enabling them to file appeal inthe court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora. According to the learned counsel without wastage of furthertime, on return of the documents, appeal was preferred in the court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora. Hefurther submitted that alongwith memo: of appeal application under Section 5 of the LimitationAct was filed for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal on account of above mentioned facts,but the learned Appellate Court without deciding the question as to whether appeal filed beyondthe prescribed period of limitation was condonable or otherwise straightaway dismissed the appealof the petitioners, as such the impugned judgment and decree is liable to be set aside. The learnedcounsel emphatically contended that it was obligatory for the appellate court to have considered asto whether in the given facts and circumstances of the case the delay in preferring the appeal wascondonable. He further submitted that without determining the question on the point of limitationappeal should not have been dismissed as barred by time. To supplement his contentions reliancewas placed on the reported judgments i.e 2001 SCMR 1001, Ghulam Hussain Vs. Jamshed Ali andothers; 2002 SCMR 134, Sajjawal Khan Vs. Wali Muhammad and others; 2001 SCMR 1254 AbdulMajeed and anothers Vs. Ghulam Haider and others and; 1995 SCMR 584 Sherin and 4 others Vs.Fazal Muhammad and 4 others.

9. Mr. Naeem Akhtar, the learned counsel for the respondent contended that the petitionerswere represented by a senior counsel in the revision petition through whom the Civil Revision wasfiled in this court against the judgment and decree of Qazi Court, therefore, the wrong adviserendered by the counsel would not justify nor would be a sufficient cause to condone the delayin preferring the appeal beyond the prescribed period of limitation, hence; the appellate courtappropriately dismissed the appeal as barred by time. He further submitted that since the petitionerswere represented through the counsel in the revision petition, therefore, it cannot be assumed thatthey were misled by the decree passed by the trial court about the suit having been decreed infavour of the plaintiff/respondent under Section-9 of the Specific Relief Act. Mr. Naeem Akhtarstrenuously argued that without due diligence revision petition was filed in this court hence; thedelay in preferring the appeal was not condonable in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances ofthe case and mere return of the memo: of civil revision petition alongwith annexures and court feeto the petitioners enabling them to file appeal in the court of Majlis-e-Shoora will not justify thedelay to be condonable, which in terms of the order dated 4.10.2001 passed by this court providedan opportunity for filing of the appeal in the appropriate forum subject to all just exceptions. Hemaintained that since the petitioner failed to make out a case fit for the condonation of delay inpreferring the appeal, therefore, the appellate decree is unexceptionable, in as much as; petitionersfailed to justify before the appellate court that they had been prosecuting on the matter with duediligence. He placed reliance on the reported judgments i.e 1998 MLD 416 Rehmdil Khan and 2others Vs. Ali Safdar Khan and 2 others and; 1985 CLC 2529 (Lahore) Abdul Ghani Vs. Mst:Musrat Rehana.


10. The contentions noted above put forth on behalf of the parties have been considered in thelight of the judgments and decrees passed by the learned courts below. The case law cited by theparties’ learned counsel have also been considered and perused carefully. It is an admitted featureof the case that against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Qazi Mashkey instead offiling appeal in the court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora directly Civil revision No.148/2000 was filedin this court and eventually on 4.10.2001 the learned counsel for the petitioners after having gonethrough the contents of the plaint, relief claimed in the suit and decree passed by the learnedQazi Court conceded to the legal position that the suit instituted by the petitioners was not a suitsimpliciter for restoration of possession within the meaning of Section-9 of the Specific Relief Act,but being a suit for declaration, possession and injunction, decreed in favour of the respondentwas amenable to the appellate jurisdiction of learned Majlis-e-Shoora, hence; in such view of thematter request was made that the memo: of revision petition etc: be returned to the petitionersenabling them to file appeal in the court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora against the impugned decree.After having attended to the contentions raised by the respondent’s learned counsel and the requestfor return of the memo: of Revision Petition etc: vide order dated 4.10.2001, reproduced in paraNo.6 supra. Memo: of Civil Revision Petition alongwith annexures was directed to be returned tothe petitioners or their learned counsel enabling them to file appeal in the court of Majlis-e-Shoorasubject to all just exceptions. Thereafter, on 17.10.2001 the petitioners filed appeal in the courtof learned Majlis-e-Shoora, Khuzdar against the judgment/decree dated 27.4.2000 passed by thelearned Qazi Mashkey. Also, an application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the LimitationAct was filed by the petitioners seeking condonation of delay in preferring the appeal beyond theprescribed period of limitation on the ground that the time consumed in prosecuting the matterbefore the High Court may in the interest of justice be condoned, as the petitioners filed appealwithin the prescribed period of limitation from the date of order i.e 4.10.2001 passed in CivilRevision Petition No.148/2000, and secondly; the delay in filing the appeal is condonable becausethe suit was decreed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff under Section-9 of the Specific Relief Act.It is not disputed that the suit instituted by the respondent was drafted by the Petition-writer of a‘Mufassil’ area and the same in the title was described to be a suit under Section 9 of the SpecificRelief Act for declaration and possession, whereas; relief of injunction was also claimed in the prayerclause of the suit. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that they were misled thatsuit was instituted under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act and the terms of decree passed by theQazi court for the suit having been decreed under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act for which thepetitioners may not be penalized/non-suited, inasmuch as; even if the appropriate remedy was notavailed by their appointed counsel the same should not in the given facts and circumstances of thecase result in depriving the petitioners to avail the appropriate remedy of appeal by condoning thedelay resulted due to prosecuting the matter by way of Civil Revision Petition. It is worthwhile tonote that the learned appellate court mainly dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation on theground that the time consumed in prospecting the matter before this court was not directed to beexcluded from the period of limitation prescribed for preferring the appeal and independently itwas not determined by the learned appellate court that the delay caused in filing the appeal beforethe Majlis-e-Shoora in the given facts of the case was condonable or otherwise.

It was held by the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Sherin and 4 others Vs. FazalMuhammad and 4 others (1995 SCMR 584) that due diligence’ and ‘ good faith’ for enlargementof time prescribed by Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1908 in terms apply only to the suits andapplications, but not to appeals, whereas; Section 5 of the said Act is applicable to the appeals andtherefore, the expressions ‘due diligence’ and ‘ good faith’ appearing in Section 14 of the act do notfigure in Section 5 and the condition prescribed in the latter Section for it is applicability is ‘sufficientcause’ which is, however; not capable of connotation, with exactitude and would differ from case to


case, therefore, the question of condonation of delay in filing an appeal has to be examined on thebasis of Section 5 of Limitation Act and not on the basis of Section 14 of the Act. Referring to thefacts of the case the honourable Supreme Court noted and found that some of the appellant areutterly illiterate and such fact was inferable from the factum of thumb impressions put by them onthe documents forming part of trial courts’ file another appellant is not an educated person whopresumably can right only write his name, accordingly; it was observed by the honourable SupremeCourt that in our system of law, when a litigant, placed in the situation as the appellants were, hasto do for redress of his grievance, through a court of law is to engage a counsel, which the appellantdid. It was further observed by the honourable Court that the appellants did not make contributionin the institution of appeal in the District Court and there was no allegation that they stood togain thereby or were guilty of any mala fide conduct on the filing of appeal in the District Courtwas entirely attributed to the carelessness of the appellants’ counsel, who represented them in thetrial court and was not unaware of the amount of court-fee paid on the plaint by the respondent,on the objection of the appellants, which determined the forum of appeal. He also appeared for theappellants in the High Court. The honourable Supreme Court having noticed the conduct of theAdvocate in filing the appeal in the District Court observed that if the law has to march with thechanging of time some restraint needs to be exhibited by the courts in imposing too large a burdenon a litigant for the lapses of his counsel. The honourable court having elaborately consideredprovisions of Order VII Rule 10 CPC in view of provisions of order XLI CPC with reference toSection 107 CPC and the earlier reported judgment of the honourable Supreme Court in the caseof Siddique Khan Vs. Abdul Shakoor (PLD 1984 SC. 289) in somewhat similar situation whereinit was held that Section 107 (2) CPC is also applicable to memorandum of appeal and thus; in theformer case law it was held by the honourable court that the provisions of Order VII Rule 10 CPCare mandatory and the court has no jurisdiction to hear the suit. It is under a compulsion to returnthe plaint for presentation before the proper court and thus; there is no reason to whittle down theimperative character of this provision while applying it to the appellate court. The honourable courtfurther observed that all the public authorities including the judicial functionaries while doing anact enjoined by law or merely empowered to do it must not do it improperly. Quoting and referringto the legal maxim “actus curiae’ the classic remarks of Lord Eldon in Pulteny V. Warren (1801)6 Ves. 73, 92 quoted by Maclean C.J, Lakhan Chunder Sen v. Madhu Sen (ILR 35 Calcutta 209)were reproduced as under:—

If there be a principle, upon Courts of justice ought to act without scruple, it is this; to relieveparties against that injustice against that injustice occasioned by its own acts or oversights atthe instance of the party, against whom the relief is sought. That proposition is broadly laiddown in some of the cases. This view was approved of by the House of Lords in the East IndiaCompany v. Campion (1837) 11 Bli. (N.S) 158.

Observations of Lord Cairns L.C in Rodger v. The comptoir d’Escompte de Paris (1871) 3P.C.465, quoted with the approval by Lord Carson in Jai Berham v. Kedar Nath (AIR 1922 PC269)were also reproduced in former case law i.e 1995 SCMR 584 as under:—

One of the first and highest duties of all Courts is to take care that the act of the Court doesnot cause injury to any of the suitors and when the expression ‘ the act of the Court’ is used,it does not mean merely the act of the Primary Court, or of any intermediate Court of Appeal,but the act of the court as a whole from the lowest Court which entertains jurisdiction overthe matter up to the highest Court which finally disposes of the case.

The above quoted rule, which perhaps was in somewhat close proximity of the case beforehonourable Supreme Court was demonstrated by application in Hiddayatullah Vs. Murad A. Khan


(PLD 1972 SC. 69) in which the honourable court stepped in to relieve the appellants before thecourt of the wrong caused to them by the act of the trial court.

The honourable Supreme Court lastly adverting to the case before it held that omission onthe part of the District Judge to take timely action as major cause of refiling of the appeal bythe appellants in the High Court, out of time, who have the victim of the act of court whichfurnishes ‘sufficient cause’ under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay and thefact that after receiving the memo: of appeal from the District Court some time was consumedby the appellants in presenting the appeal to the High Court in the circumstances of the case isinconsequential, therefore, the honourable Supreme Court condoned the delay in presenting thememo: of appeal to the High Court and thus; the first appeal filed by the appellants in the HighCourt was treated as pending and directed to be disposed of afresh on merits in accordance withlaw.

The Hon’ble Court in its elaborate judgment (PLD 1972 SC 69), with regard to the facts of thecase before it observed that

had the trial court disposed of the application soon after it was filed, the difficulty faced bythe pre-emptors would not have arisen and maintained “ there was as we have already pointedout, a very good and substantial reason for the extension of time, because even assuming thatno application was made by the appellants for such extension of time, the Court in the interestof justice, was fully competent suo-moto to extend the time when it had by its own act madeit practically impossible for the appellants to comply with its original order by adjourning theapplication for furnishing security to the 6th of January, 1968.

Furthermore; in the quoted reported judgment, (1995 SCMR 584) the Hon’ble Supreme Courtalso made reference to the observation recorded by the allahabad high Court in the case of HariRam V. Akhtar Hussain (ILR 29 All 749) reproduced hereinbelow:-

The mistake may in its origin be the mistake of plaintiff; by the time the plaint has beenregistered, the mistake has become the mistake of the Court. If the Court or the Munsariamdiscovered The plaintiff’s mistake before registration of the plaint, the plaint would at once berejected under section 54 of the Civil Procedure Code and never registered at all.

The above noted observations were recorded by the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Courtand held that the occasion to adjudicate upon the defendants, in a pre-emption suit that mistakein court-fee by a party is not covered by section 28 of Court Fees Act, 1870, and it applied onlywhen a document not properly stamped, was received and used by the Court or office by mistake orinadvertence. The objection was repelled with the observations referred to above, and were notedas quite instructive.

In the reported judgment (1995 SCMR 584) as regards filing of appeal in a wrong Court onaccount of mistaken advice of counsel, it has been observed that the same would not by itself justifyfor condonation of delay but when the litigant and the counsel have acted with due care and cautionand their conduct does not smack of negligence, the institution of appeal in the wrong forum couldconstitute a “sufficient cause” within meaning of section-5 of the Limitation Act for condonationof delay. Similarly in the case of Abdul Majeed and another v. Ghulam Haider and others (2001SCMR 1254) it was held that the ”ill-advice even by a lawyer is not-a ground for extension of timeof limitation for filing of appeal in wrong forum but where the litigant and the counsel had actedwith due care and caution and their conduct did not smack of negligence, the institution of appealin wrong forum could constitute a sufficient cause within the meaning of section 5 of Limitation Act,1908. The same rule was followed in the case of Abdul Ghani v. Mussarat Rehana by the Hon’bleDivision Bench of the Lahore High Court (1985 CLC 2529) cited by the respondent’s learned counsel


and it was held by the Hon’ble Court that error in filing appeal in the Court of District Judge, wasso patent, that it could have been avoided by exercising due care, thus wrong advice of a counseldoes not furnish a foundation for enlargement of time, consequently; application filed under sections5 and 14 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay was rejected. In the case of Rehmdil Khanand 2 others v. Ali Safdar Khan and 2 others (1998 ,MLD 416) civil petition for leave to appealwas dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court (AJ&K) in view of the rule laid down in the reportedjudgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the subject i.e. 1985 SCMR 890. 1992 SCR292 and1992 SCR 98 and it was held that delay for filing of case due to wrong advice of counsel was not asufficient cause for condonation of the delay as the same did not constitute bona fide mistake and;the party could claim compensation from counsel for his negligence if so advised.

11. It has consistently been held by Hon’b1e Supreme Court as well as in the above-quotedreported judgment that negligence on the part of counsel or wrong advice of counsel resulting intofiling of appeal in a wrong forum/Court would not by itself be a sufficient cause for condonation ofdelay in resorting to an appropriate remedy unless it has been shown that the aggrieved party orhis counsel, as the case may be, acted with due care and caution in availing the remedy amountingto sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal within meaning of section 5 of theLimitation Act. Keeping in view the dictum A laid down in the judgment of Hon’ble SupremeCourt of Pakistan referred to above and applied by the Hon’ble Court in the case of Sherin and4 others v. Fazal Muhammad and 4 others (1995 SCMR 584) in the given circumstances of this,case which are similar and identical to the case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court hence the sameneeds be 18 considered and attended to from the angle that first and highest duties of a Courtis to take care that the act of the Court does not cause injury 10 any of the suitors, as well asin view of the observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above mentioned reportedjudgments referred to in para No.10 supra. It is worthwhile to note that the petitioners in theinstant case through their appointed counsel, instead of filing appeal against judgment and decreedated 27-4-2(XX) passed by Qazi Mashkay, in the Court of Majlis-e-Shoora, filed civil revisionpetition directly in this Court within prescribed period of limitation meant for filing of appealin the Court of Majlis-e-Sboora which was entertained by the Additional Registrar of the Courtwithout objection as to the competency of the revision petition against the final decree passed bythe Qazi Court, (though; not obligatory for the officer of the Court to have recorded objection) andto have fixed the matter for orders of the Court. Eventually before admission of revision petition,the learned counsel for the petitioners on the date fixed in the matter i.e 4-10-2001 after havinggone through the contents of plaint, relief claimed in the suit and decree passed by learned QaziCourt, and; the objection raised by the learned counsel of the respondent, conceded to the legalposition that the decree passed by original Court was appealable before Majlis-e-Shoora and thisCourt after hearing the parties learned counsel vide order of even date reproduced in para No.6supra directed that memo of revision petition etc. be returned to the petitioners or their learnedcounsel for preferring appeal before the competent forum/Appellate, Court. The case file relating toCivil Revision No.248 of 2000 shows that on the very next date i.e. 5-10-2001 these documents werereturned to the petitioners and the petitioners thereafter filed appeal in the Court of learned Majlis-e-Shoora, Khuzdar on or about 14-10-2001. A part from the in-advice of the learned counsel, it isworthwhile to note the the Additional Registrar of this Court who entertained the revision petitionto have noted objection with regard to the in competency of the petition which was not done withthe result that for one or the other reason the matter remained pending till the date parties learnedcounsel were heard and order was passed by the Court on the same date and during this period thetime for preferring appeal against decree before the competent forum stood elapsed hence the rulehighlighted, followed and applied by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above mentioned referredreported case that act of Court should not non-suit any party to the proceeding, equally applies


to the facts of the instant case, as had the civil revision petition entertained by the officer of theCourt subject to objection or fixed for orders of the Court on such objection or the same if had beenreturned to the petitioners within the period of limitation for filing of appeal before the competentforum or an appropriate order if were passed by the Court as to the competency of civil revisionpetition within such period; the appeal subsequently preferred against decree of the Qazi Courtwould not have become time-barred, therefore, the petitioners who engaged the services of counselbeing aggrieved of the decree of the trial Court, should not suffer and be not non-suited for noneof their fault hence in the given circumstances of the case the delay occurred in preferring appealbefore Majlis-e-Shoora for the above mentioned reasons is condonable within the meaning of section5 of the Limitation Act which stands accordingly condoned.

The result is that the impugned appellate judgment and decree are set aside and appeal filedby the petitioners shall be treated as on the file of the Majlis-e-Shoora, Khuzdar which be decidedafter hearing the parties on its own merits in accordance with law. This Civil revision petition ispartly allowed in the above terms, leaving the to bear their own costs.

Announced on22 September, 2003

Sd.CHIEF JUSTICE.

3.4 Haji Bostan Ali v. The State


Crl: Bail Application No .134/2002.

Date of hearing (09-07-2002).Applicant by Syed Ayyaz Zahoor, Advocate.

The State by K. N. Kohli DAG

ORDERRaja Fayyaz Ahmad. C.J.—The accused/applicant was arrested and has been confined In

District Jail, Quetta In connection with case Crime No. 02/02 dated 25.4.2002 registered withPassport Circle FIA U/S 17/18 and 22 of Immigration Ordinance, 1979 and U/S, 420/109/34 PPCpursuant to the finalization of the inquiry No. 01/02 of FIA Passport Circle, Quetta.

The bail plea of the accused/applicant has been rejected by the learned Additional SessionsJudge-I, Quetta vide order dated 12.6.2002 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.152/02.

2. The brief facts of the case are that upon finalization on inquiry number 01/02 conducted by theFIA, Passport Circle, Quetta it came to limelight that accused Bostan Ali Recruiting agent residentof Alamdar Road, Quetta had lured the complainants Ishaq Ali and Ramzan Ali that he will sendand arrange for the immigration of the brother of Ishaq Ali and son of Ramzan Ali to Australia Inconsideration of Rs. 2,50,000/- each and in this way accused Haji Bostan Ali successfully receivedRs. 500,000 for each of the abovesaid persons to be deported by him to Australia. After receiving theabove mentioned amount, accused Haji Bostan, Ali transported these two persons besides othersto Cambodia instead of Australia and after about three months a group of these Emigrants wasmanaged to be boarded in a very old Launch during night hours which hardly covered a distanceof few furlongs went on capsizing and in the meantime, the Cambodian Cost Guard having foundthe launch in such condition approached to rescue the passengers of the said Launch in whichthey succeeded and subsequently; the Migrants boarded in the Launch including the abovesaid twopersons were handed over to International Organization of Migrants (IOM) of the United Nations


and the complainant Ishaq Ali and Ramzan Ali on having received information of such eventsapproached to accused Haji Bostan Ali for the return of the abovesaid amount received by himand for the safety of their brother and son respectively but this time again the accused promised,undertook and induced them that he will send the said persons to Australia through another routeand; as both these two persons were very keen to go abroad in search of livelihood they were againsent to Singapore and from there, the brother and nephew of the complainant Ishaq Ali were shiftedto Jakarta through an agent an ultimately were left stranded. In view of the evidence documentaryand oral plated during the course of inquiry, it was proved to the satisfaction of the Inquiry Officerthat accused Haji Bostan Ali extracted an amount of Rs. 500,000/- on the pretext for Migratingthe needee persons to Australia and thereby accused Haji Bostan Ali and others committed theoffence punishable under Sections 17/18/22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 and under Sections420/109/34 PPC.

3. PW Muhammad Hadi son of Muhammad Juma in his statement recorded under Section 161Cr.P.C stated that he was in search for employment and ultimately he and his elder brother IshaqAli came to know through people of the Mohallah that Ex-Councilor Haji Bostan Ali arranges forthe employment of people in Australia and for the job he receives Rs. 2,50,000/- therefore, his elderbrother Ishaq Ali and uncle Ramzan Ali met with accused Haji Bostan Ali for seeking employmentfor the witness (Muhammad Hadi) and his cousin Muhammad Arif in Australia and at that time hisbrother and uncle were also accompanied by their friends Ramzan and Nisar Ali. On being contactedas aforesaid Haji Bostan Ali demanded Rs. 2,50,000/- each for providing employment to the witnessand his cousin Arif in Australia, therefore, his brother and uncle paid Rupees Five Lacs to accusedwho was to provide employment to them in Australia and also their Passports, copies of the 1.D.Cards were handed over to the accused. According to the witness on 3.5.01 he and Muhammad Arifwere sent to Lahore by train by Haji Bostan Ali and on reaching there, the accused Syed MuhammadShah took them from Railway Station, Lahore and after that they stayed in Shabistan Hotel, Mc-loed Road Australia chowk, Lahore. On 10.5.01 Haji Bostan Ali deported them to Cambodia byThai International Air Lines. After their arrival on Cambodian Airport, obtained visa for a week andstayed in Royal Higen Hotel as instructed by Haji Bostan Ali and were assisted by representativeof accused Haji Bostan Ali namely Syed Muhammad Shah. Subsequently on or about 8.7.2001they were boarded in a boat from a Coastal City in which 255 passengers were on the seats butafter undergoing two hours journey in the sea they were arrested by the Cambodian Coast Guardsand were brought back to Banam-Ban and ultimately on 28.7.01 the Cambodian police deportedthem to Pakistan by a Plane and on 30.7.01 he and Arif returned to Quetta thereafter his elderbrother Ishaq Ali and uncle Ramzan Ali again approached to Haji Bostan Ali who pacified them andassured to remain satisfied by under-taking that he will again manage to send them to Australia,subsequently; on 12th August, 2001 according to the witness Haji Bostan Ali sent them to Lahoreby Chiltan Express and stayed in New Prince Hotel, Mc-loed Road, Lahore. After about 22 daysstay at Lahore, younger brother of accused namely Sikandar Ali took them to Lahore Airport tothe hotel and on 5/9/2001 they were send to Singapore by Thi international Airline and SikanderAli also accompanied them. Two days after their arrival in Singapore he obtained Visa for themand were sent to Malaysia and after a few days Sikandar Ali also came there and they both i.e. thewitness and Muhammad Arif were handed over to one Malaysian agent who took them alongwitheleven other persons of different nationalities and were boarded in a boat in open sea and fromthere they all were shifted in a large boat and were taken to an Indonasia Island known as Sumatraand ultimately were given in the charge of one Indonasian agent who also charged 200 Dollars fromeach of them and took them to Jao Island but ultimately were arrested by Indonasian police of CityBaghor. After that PW Muhammad Hadi was sent to Pakistan with the assistance of InternationalOrganization for Migration (M.O.I) and thus he reached back to Quetta on 28.11.2001, whereas;


his cousin Muhammad Arif could not be deported as he had no money and still living in the Campestablished by International Organization of Emigration in Indonasia. Further the witness allegedthat after his return to Quetta his elder brother Ishaq Ali approached to accused Haji Bostan Ali byinforming him that he failed to honour his commitment nor employment was provided, therefore,the amount received by him for sending the witness to Australia and providing employment bereturned but he refused to return the amount, and; extended threats.

PWs Ishaq Ali son of Ali Juma, Arbab Muhmrnad Raza son of Arbab Qurban Ali and RamzanAli son of Barat Ali in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C have also narratedthe facts relating to the case as contained in the statement of PW Muhammad Hadi, moreover;statements of PWs Ishaq Ali and Ramzan Ali were also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C by thelearned Judicial Magistrate-IV/MFC Quetta and opportunity of cross examination was also availedby accused Haji Bostan Ali. In these statements as well in substance they have deposed the factsas stated by them in their respective statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned DAG at length Syed AyyazZahoor, Advocate contended that in view of given facts and circumstances of the case Sections18 and 22 of the Immigration Ordinance, 1979 have no application and secondly if it be assumedthat the offence falls under Section 19 of Ordinance; the punishment provided is in the alternatei.e. 14 years imprisonment or fine or with both hence; the bar as contained in Section 497 Cr.P.Cto grant bail will not be attracted. According to the learned counsel the maximum punishmentprovided for the offence under Section 17 of the Ordinance being less than 10 years imprisonment,extendable up to only 5 years imprisonment since does not attract the prohibitory clause of Section497 Cr. P. C does not disentitle the applicant/accused to the grant of bail and moreover; the offenceunder. Section 420 PPC is bailable. Further the learned counsel contended that investigation in thecase has been completed and the accused is no more required for the purpose of interrogation andchallan for trial of the offence under Section 420/109/34 PPC has already been filed in the courtof competent jurisdiction hence; on consideration of these grounds the accused/applicant may inthe interest of justice be admitted to bail. As regards the question of bail in view of the alternatepunishment provided in Sections 18 and 22 of the Immigration Ordinance, 1979 he placed relianceon the judgment reported in the case of Shakeel Hassan Rashidi V/s. The State 1992 MLD 99.

5. The learned Deputy Attorney General contended that in view of over whelming incriminatingevidence documentary and oral collected during the course of investigation offence under Sections18 and 22 of the Immigration Ordinance, 1979 and under Section 420 PPC stand attracted hencein view of the punishment provided under Sections 18/22 of the Ordinance, the accused is notentitled to the concession of bail as both these offences are not bailable and keeping in view thenature of the allegations and the sufferings to which Muhammad Hadi and Arif were to undergofor months, out of whom Arif having become destitute is still living in the Camp maintained byInternational Organization of Emigration in Indonasia; disentitled the accused for bail. The learnedDAG to supplement his contention placed reliance on the reported judgments i.e. 2001 P.Cr.L.J588, PLD 1982 Karachi 1011 and 1986 P.Cr.L.J (Lah:) 567.

6. The contentions put forth on behalf of the accused as well as by the learned DAG have beenconsidered in the light of the record of the case made available by the learned DAG. From theperusal of the statements of the aforesaid witnesses as well as statements of PWs Ishaq Ali andRamzan Ali recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, prima facie it appears that Ishaq Ali and RamzanAli were assured, promised and induced by the applicant that their brother and son respectivelyMuhammad Hadi and Arif will be sent by him to Australia and to them both employment willalso be provided in the foreign country, and; in consideration of such services, he received Rupeesfive lacs i.e. Rs. 2,50,000/- for each of the abovesaid persons from Ishaq Ali and Ramzan Ali. Afterreceiving of the amount, both the said persons were sent to different countries by the accused,


as referred to herein above and eventually they were left stranded in Indonasia at the mercy ofcircumstances and ultimately were arrested by the Indonasian Police, out of whom PW MuhammadHadi having the money with him for his fare etc was deported to Pakistan through the assistanceof the International Organization for Migrants while Arif for want of money to pay for his fare isliving in the Camp in Indonsia. The Passports of both these persons are available on the record,perusal whereof also confirms that Hadi and Arif as stated by PW Muhammad Hadi in his statementunder Section 161 Cr.P.C were Migrated to the said countries. The incriminating material in theshape of statements of abovesaid PWs attracts the Penal. Provisions of Sections 18 and 22 of theImmigration Ordinance, 1979 including Section 420 PPC. Undisputedly the offence under Section18 and 22 of the Immigration Ordinance, 1979 are not bailable providing punishment for a term ofimprisonment which may extend up to 14 years, or with fine or with both. As the accused/applicantis prima facie involved in the commission of the offence under Section 18 and 22 of the Ordinance,1979 which being not bailable disentitled the applicant to claim bail as a matter of right in the givenfacts and circumstances of the case referred to above, hence; the case law cited by the applicant’slearned counsel that the offences in view of alternate punishments provided in these

Sections does not attract the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C helps not improvinghis case any further. No other ground was urged or argued by the applicant’s learned counsel.Consequently; in view of the foregoing reasons this bail application being devoid of any meritstands rejected at this stage. The observations as to the criminal liability of the applicant made inthis order are only tentative in nature which shall have no effect on merits of the case at the trial.

Announced on17th July, 2002

Sd.CHIEF JUSTICE.

3.5 Muhammad Aslam Shah v. Fida Muhammad & another


F.A.O. No.135/2000.

Date of hearing 8-05-2002Appellant Muhammad Aslam Shah/by Bisharatullah Advocate

Respondent Fida Muhanmmad and others by Mr. Walayat Hussain Advocate

JUDGMENT

Raja Fayyaz Ahmed C.J.—This appeal under Section 15 of Balochistan Urban (Rent Re-striction) Ordinance No. VI of 1959 has been directed against order dated 31.5.2000 passed by thelearned Civil Judge-II/Rent Controller, Quetta whereby the eviction application filed by respondentNo. 1 against the appellant and respondent No. 2 has been allowed and they were directed to handover the vacant possession of the shop to the respondent No.1.

2. The Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1 instituted an eviction applicationon 4.9.1999 under Section 13 of Balochistan Urban (Rent Restriction) Ordinance No. VI of 1959against the appellant and respondent No.2 contending therein that he is the owner and landlordof the Municipal Shop No.1-22/41 X (3586), situated in Mahal and Mouza Ward No.47, QuettaUrban, measuring 122 Sq ft: situated at Ibrahim Khan Lane, Kansi Road, Quetta, which was rentedout to the appellant against the monthly rent of Rs. 1300. It has further been contended that on26.6.1999 a legal notice under Section 13-A on behalf of the respondent No.1 was issued to theappellant which was/duly received by the appellant, who vide his reply to notice acknowledged


and attorned the respondent No.1 as owner and landlord of the shop in question by accepting hisown status as that of a tenant in the shop against the rent of Rs.1300/- per month payable to therespondent No.1. Eviction of the appellant and respondent No.2., was sought for on the groundsthat the appellant committed wilful default in the payment of rent of the shop since June 1999onwards, who also sublet half portion of the shop in question to the respondent No.2 without thewritten consent of the respondent No.1/landlord as well as shop in question being reasonably and ingood faith required by the respondent No.1/landlord for his personal use of business, consequently;the appellant as well as respondent No.2 was approached to hand over the vacant possession of theshop, but they refused to do the needful, hence; on these facts and grounds eviction application wasfiled.

Both the respondents in the eviction application were served, out of whom appellant being therespondent No.1 in the eviction application by means of his rejoinder dated 20.12.2000 contestedthe grounds, on which eviction was sought for, whereas; respondent No.2 Talib absented himselfand was proceeded ex-party on 11.11.1999 nor did he file rejoinder to the eviction application.

3. Out of pleadings of the parties, the learned, Civil, Judge-II/Rent Controller, Quetta framedthe following issues:

1. Whether the respondent No.1 has committed default in submitting rent of the shop in questionfrom June, 1999, therefore is liable to be evicted?

2. Whether the respondent No.1 has sub-letted the half portion of the shop in question torespondent No.2 without prior permission/consent of the appellant?

3. Whether the appellant requires shop in question for his personal occupation and bona fideuse of the same?

4. Whether the appellant is entitled for the relief claimed for?

5. Relief.

4. The respondent No.1/landlord in support of his claim in the light of above noted issues filedsworn in affidavits of two witnesses namely Muhammad Abid and Noor Muhammad as well asfiled his own duly sworn in affidavit in support of the case. After completion of the evidence ofthe respondent No.1 the matter was adjourned for the evidence of the appellant from time to timeand finally on 20.5.2000 due to non-production of evidence by the appellant his defence was struckoff and; the learned Rent Controller after hearing the parties learned counsel vide order impugnedherein allowed the eviction application directing the appellant as well as respondent No.2 to handover the vacant possession of the shop to the respondent No.1/landlord by resolving all the issuesin affirmative.

5. As regards the ground of eviction relating to the wilful default in the payment of rent sinceJune, 1999 onwards is concerned, it was contended in the rejoinder filed by the appellant that he wascognizant to his, liability so, the due rent was remitted to the applicant from Chakwal by money-orders, but the applicant refused to receive the same, however; it was offered that he is ready andwilling to deposit the same in court in favour of the applicant. He denied to have committed wilfuldefault in the payment of rent and being first defaulter the non-payment of rent as claimed in theeviction application is condonable. As hereinabove noted the other grounds on which the evictionwas sought for were also contested and in para No.6 of the rejoinder plea has been taken that incase the shop in question was reasonably and in good faith required for personal needs of business,such alleged fact at least should have been mentioned in the legal notice issued to the appellantunder Section- 13-A of Balochistan Ordinance No.VI 1959.


6. Deponent Muhammad Abid in his affidavit deposed that he has seen the shop in questionand also knows the parties. According to him the shop in dispute was rented out to the appellantby the respondent No.1 against the monthly rent of Rs.1300/- and since June, 1999 onwards renthas not been paid by the appellant (respondent No.1 in. the eviction applicant), who also subletthe half portion of the shop to the respondent No.2. He further deposed in the affidavit that forhalf portion of the shop, respondent No.2 is paying rent to the appellant and the shop in dispute isrequired for the personal bona fide needs of business by the landlord, who does not have any othershop in Quetta city.

The second witness of the landlord namely Noor Muhammad deposed in his affidavit that theshop in question has been leased out to the appellant against the monthly rent of, Rs.1300/- andsince June, 1999 onwards rent has not been paid by the tenant (appellant). Moreover; half portionof the shop in question has been sublet to respondent No.2 by the tenant(appellant) without thepermission of the landlord and according to him the landlord is jobless and the shop in dispute isrequired by the landlord for his personal needs of business who does not hold any other shop inQuetta city for doing the business.

Landlord/respondent No.1 deposed that on 26.6.1999 he issued legal notice through his Advo-cate to the appellant (respondent No.1 in eviction application) intimating about the title of theproperty/shop having been transferred in his favour and about rent, and; in response thereto videreply dated 9.7.1999 sent to his counsel right to receive rent was accepted and acknowledged bythe occupant tenant. Further in the affidavit it has been deposed that the respondent No.1 in theeviction application is his tenant in the shop in question against the monthly rent of Rs.1300/-, butdespite service of notice and acknowledging the liability to pay the rent, he has failed to pay therent of the shop since June, 1999 till date to him. He further deposed that without his permissionhalf portion of the shop in dispute was sublet to respondent No.2 by the tenant, who partitionedthe shop into two portions and 1 further that ,the shop in dispute is reasonably and in good faithrequired by him for his personal bona fide needs of business and for the purpose he does not holdany other shop in Quetta city. He explained that due to death of his young son he is facing greathardships and both the said respondents are liable to ejectment from the shop in dispute.

7. Respondent No.1 as well as his abovesaid witnesses appeared in the witness box and weresubjected to cross examination by the appellant’s counsel in view of their sworn in affidavits filedin the Court.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Walayat Hussain for respondent.Mr. Basharatullah contended:—

a) That the landlord through evidence failed to prove that the appellant committed willful defaultin the payment of rent and secondly the issue No.1 with regard to the alleged default for thethe month of June, July and August, 1999 since was deposited with the learned Rent Controllerwithin sixty days from the date on which the rent for these months had become due within thepurview of Section-13 (2)(i) of Balochistan Urban (Rent Restriction) Ordinance No.VI of 1959hence finding the appellant to have committed default in the payment of rent for these monthscannot sustain and; thirdly the liability to pay the outstanding arrears of rent as claimed inthe eviction application was not disputed in the rejoinder to the eviction application rather; theentire due and outstanding rent was duly deposited with the Rent Controller after the filing ofthe eviction application. Moreover; the due rent was remitted by money orders to the respondentNo.1/landlord who did not receive the same hence; the entire rent payable having been tenderedand refused to be accepted does not entail penal consequences.


b) The respondent No.l/landlord failed to successfully discharge the onus of issue No.2 and 3 re-spectively relating to the grounds of subletting and bonafide personal requirement hence; thefindings on these issues deserve to be reversed.

c) Close scrutiny of evidence produced by the respondent No.1 sufficiently indicate that the re-spondent No.l/landlord has long before permanently shifted from Quetta to Cbakwal alongwithhis family i.e. wife and children and prior to shifting to Chakwal, the respondent No.1 has soldentire of his properties commercial and residential in Quetta including the house in which hewas residing hence; in these circumstance it cannot be assumed that the shop in question isreasonably in good faith required the landlord for his needs of business.

d) Reasonable and fair opportunity for producing evidence in rebuttal was not afforded to theappellant by the learned Rent Controller and within a period of less than thirty days the defenceof the appellant was struck off which has caused serious prejudice to the appellant hence; on thisscore as well the impugned order cannot sustain.

9. Walayat Hussain, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 at the very out set submittedthat he does not press the ground of eviction with regard to the default in the payment of rentin view of the contention raised in a such behalf by the appellant’s learned counsel however; thelearned counsel strenuously contended that the onus of issues as regards No.2 and 3 are concernedwas successfully discharged by the landlord/respondent No.1 and the findings on these issues areunexceptionable. According to the learned counsel merely having sold out some of the shops inQuetta and the house in which the landlord was residing perse does not adversely reflect uponthe bonafides of the respondent No.1 for the shop in question being reasonably required for hispersonal needs of business and as regards the frequent visits of the landlord to Chakwal or of hischildren having gone to Chakwal to see their ailing mother, duly explained by the landlord in hisevidence, would not be enough to hold that the landlord failed to show his bonafides and personalrequirement. The learned counsel contended that evidence on the point including that of the landlordis consistent, convincing and reliable which the appellant failed to rebut hence; findings recordedby the learned Rent Controller on issue No.3 based upon evidence cannot be lightly interfered withFurther the learned counsel argued that through evidence it was duly substantiated by the landlordthat without written consent half portion of the shop in dispute was sublet to the respondent.No.2 by the appellant and evidence on the point could not be discredited hence; the learned RentController on proper appraisal of evidence resolved issue No.2 in affirmative. He further argued thatsix opportunities on different dates were provided to the appellant for production of evidence butfor no-justification he failed to produce any witness in rebuttal nor himself appeared in the witnessbox consequently; the learned Rent Controller was left with no option but close his evidence andthe plea in such behalf that fair and reasonable opportunity for leading evidence was not afforded,is not sound.

10. The contentions put forth on behalf of the parties have been considered in the light of theirpleadings, issues and the evidence produced by the landlord which has been gone through carefullyincluding eviction order. Also the evidence produced by the landlord has been independently cometo a appraised in order to/just conclusion.

Since the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 conceded to the contentions of the learnedcounsel for the appellant as regards issue No.1 is concerned as well as failed to support the findingsof the learned Rent Controller on issue No.1 or reversed, accordingly; the said issue stands resolvedin negative.

The case of the landlord is that the shop in question is reasonably and in good faith required byhim for his personal needs of business, as he is jobless and does not hold any other shop in Quetta


City and secondly the appellant without his written permission bas sublet half portion of the ”shopin question to the appellant. In support of these grounds respectively issues No.2 and 3 were struckby the learned Rent Controller. In order to discharge the onus of these issues the respondent No.IIfiled affidavits of two witnesses namely Muhammad Abid and Noor Muhammad as well as filled hisown affidavit and they also appeared in witness box for the purpose of cross examination and suchright was availed by the appellant’s learned counsel. Both the abovesaid witnesses have deposed thatthey know the parties and have also seen the shop in question in which the appellant is the tenant ofthe respondent No.1 against the monthly rent of Rs.1300/. They further affirmed that the landlordis jobless and the shop in question is required by him for his personal needs of business and is alsonot in possession of any other shop in Quetta City. Moreover; these witnesses have also deposedthat without the consent of the landlord half portion of the shop in question has been sublet by thetenant to the respondent No.2. The respondent No.1/landlord has deposed that without his consentand permission half portion of the shop has been sublet by the tenant to the respondent No.2 by,partitioning the shop and secondly the same is reasonable and in good faith required by him for hisbusiness needs and is not in possession of any other shop in Quetta City. He also explained that hisyoung son has died and he is facing financial crises.

The version of the landlord as well as of his two witnesses on the point i.e. personal requirementand subletting could not be discredited on cross examination, however; it transpires from the evi-dence that the house in which the respondent No.1/landlord was living has been sold besides someother shops owned by him near to the shop in question and secondly he visits Chakwal where also hiswife is residing and it has been explained in the cross examination by the respondent No.l/landlordon his own that his wife is a sick person, therefore, for the purpose of treatment she has been re-siding there and his children have now left for Chakwal to see their ailing mother, the landlord alsoadmitted that for the date of hearing he has come to Quetta from Chakwal but these facts alone inthe ordinary course would not be sufficient to hold that requirement of the shop for personal needsof business to be not bona fide as the landlord himself is always a best judge to manage and tacklehis own dealings and affairs as he deems fit and proper nor such facts in absence of evidence tothe contrary culminates into the taking of an exception that the landlord has permanently shiftedto Chakwal and thus the ground of eviction with regard to the shop being required for personalneeds of business to be ill founded and malafide. Visits of landlord to Chakwal to attend his sickwife or temporary and frequent visits of landlord to Chakwal after disposal of other properties inQuetta alone would not be sufficient to conclude that he does not require the shop in dispute forhis business needs and in good faith because primarily such acts relate to the private and internalaffairs & dealings of such person which from case to case vary and depending upon one’s own needsand benefits hence; in my considered view the respondent No.1/landlord successfully discharged theonus of issue No.2 and 3 and the learned Rent Controller on proper appraisal of evidence resolvedboth the issues in affirmative.

Adverting to the contentions that fair and reasonable opportunity for leading evidence in rebuttalwas not afforded to the appellant, it may be seen that -the case was fixed on 29.4.2000, 8.5.2000and 20.5.2000 for production of evidence or filing of affidavits of witnesses by the appellant butwithout any explanation offered by the appellant’s learned counsel be failed to file affidavits norwas advanced any reason which precluded the appellant to produce witnesses or even to file affidavitof his witness although; twice cost was also imposed for non-production of evidence consequently;vide order dated 20.5.2000 evidence of the appellant was closed by learned Rent Controller and thecase was adjourned to 23.5.2000 for the statement of the appellant but on the date the appellantalso did not appear and the matter was adjourned to 24.5.2000 but again he did not appear inthe court and his learned counsel did not advance any reason about the failure of the appellant toappear in court for statement consequently; his right to appear in the witness box was also closed


and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the eviction order impugned herein was passed.It is pertinent to note that on all these dates the learned counsel for the appellant appeared on hisbehalf in the court but he did not advance any reason on any of such dates on account of whichthe affidavits of witnesses were not filed and the failure on the part of the appellant to appearin court for statement hence; in view of these facts the submission of the learned counsel for theappellant that during this period the appellant remained out of station on account of illness of hisson appear to be unsound and had it been so, the appellant could have informed to his counselabout the cause which precluded him to produce evidence by a telephone call or by telegram oreven by post in absence whereof merely for the reason that since these opportunities/dates fixed bythe court involved a period of less than not thirty days will/lead to believe that fair and reasonable,opportunity for leading evidence was not afforded by the learned Rent controller. As herein forenoted since on none of the abovementioned dates any reason was put forth by the appellant’s learnedcounsel which prevented the appellant to produce evidence or to himself appear in court, therefore,it cannot be said that fair and reasonable opportunity was not afforded for production of evidenceand thus; the multiple opportunities given for the purpose to the appellant within a period of lessthan thirty days in the ordinary course amounts to the providing of fair and reasonable opportunityfor production of evidence hence; the ground so urged also seems to be devoid of any substance.

Thus, in view of above discussion and reasons this Rent Appeal being without any merit isdismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Announced on17 July, 2002.

Sd.CHIEF JUSTICE.

3.6 Nawabzada Mir Balach Khan Marri through Attorney v. Appel-late Election Tribunal, Balochistan through Registrar, Balochis-tan High Court & 2 others


Constitution Petition No.484 of 2002.

Date of hearing 18.09.2002 Appellant: Nawabzada Mir Balach Khan Marri ThroughAttorney—Petitioner

Respondent: Appellate Election tribunal, Balochistan Through registrar Balochistan High Courtand 2 others

JUDGMENT

Akhtar Zaman Malghani,J.—Petitioner, Nawabzada Mir Balach Khan Marri has assailedorder of the Election Tribunal Balochistan, Quetta dated 10.09.2002 passed in Election Appeal No.4 of 2002, through this petition wherein the following relief has been claimed:—

i. Honorable Court may be pleased to declare that the impugned order dated 10.09.2002, ( in sofar it concerns disqualification on account of dismissal for misconduct for absence from duty)is without lawful authority and no legal effect.

ii. Honorable Court may graciously set aside the impugned order of learned Appellate Elec-tion Tribunal dated 10.09.2002 and to restore the order of Returning Officer Kohlu dated27.8.2002/30.08.2002 and to dismiss appeal of respondent No.2.


iii. Learned Court may be pleased to direct Returning Officer to include petitioner’s name in thelist of validly nominated candidates for generals election 2002 from PB-23 Kohlu Agency, Kohluwith further direction to allot symbol under the rules and to take all necessary steps allowingpetitioner to effectively participate in the forthcoming election from PB-23 Kohlu Agency.

2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the petitioner filed nomination paper for contestingelection from constituency PB-23 Kohlu Agency for Balochistan Provincial Assembly which was ac-cepted by the Returning Officer/respondent No.3 on 27.08.2002. Respondent No.2 being aggrievedby the said order, preferred an appeal before the Election Tribunal Balochistan, Quetta under Sec-tion 14 (5) of The Representation of People Act, 1976 mainly on the ground that the petitioner wasdismissed from service, as such; he was disqualified under the election laws for contesting the elec-tion and secondly; the petitioner has produced Degree of the then U.S.S.R. without any equivalencecertificate from University Grants Commission, thus does not have the prescribed qualification asrequired by Article 8-A of the Conduct of General Election Order, 2002. After hearing the partiesthe learned Election Tribunal vide impugned Order held that the petitioner was disqualified fromcontesting election being dismissed on the ground of misconduct, while ground regarding educationalqualification was overruled by the learned Election Tribunal.

It is pertinent to mention that ground of educational qualification was neither agitated norpressed before us by the counsel for respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised the following contentions:

i) That the petitioner was dismissed from service on the ground of misconduct vide Notificationdated 31.08.2000 being found absent from duty as such; he could not have been declareddisqualified. In order to substantiate his arguments he invited our attention to the provisionsof Article 8D (2) (i) of the Conduct of General Election Order, 2002 and argued that a personcould be disqualified under the said clause, only when he had been dismissed from service onthe ground of misconduct involving moral turpitude.

ii) That under Article 3, the Conduct of General Election Order has overriding effect over otherlaws including Constitution, therefore, provisions of The Representation of People Act, 1976and the Constitution will give way wherever there is any contradiction or inconsistency.

iii) That the learned Tribunal has misdirected itself by holding that of the Legal Frame WorkOrder, 2002 read with the schedule thereunder was applicable in the case of petitioner.

4. Rebutting the arguments, Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Khan Tanoli learned counsel for respondentNo.2 made the following submissions:—

i. Under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan a person must comewith clean hands in order to obtain equitable relief. According to him petitioner is an absconderand fugitive from law, as such, is not entitled to discretionary relief.

ii. The Tribunal is consisting of two Hon’ble Judges of this Court who have exercised their judicialdiscretion against the petitioner, therefore, same should not be disturbed in Writ jurisdiction.

iii. The impugned order has been passed within the jurisdiction conferred upon the Tribunal bythe statute and same cannot be termed as illegal, void or coram non judice.

iv. By making reference to various Orders issued by Chief Executive, he stated that Legal Frame-work Order being later in time will prevail over other Orders including The Conduct of GeneralElection Order, 2002.


v. He invited our attention to Article 3 of the Legal Framework Order, 2002 and according tohim by virtue of aforesaid Article this Order has come into force at once and is in the field. Hewas of the view that by the Legal Frame Work Order, 2002, Constitution has been amendedand thus under Article-63 (1) (i) a person is disqualified, if he is dismissed on the ground ofmisconduct.

vi. No Act or law can have over riding effect over the Constitution and any provision to that extentwould be void and non-existent. He relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court reportedin PLD 2002 SC 994.

vii. In the alternate he argued that if the above grounds do not find favour with the Court, eventhen the petitioner was disqualified under sub clause (k) of clause-2 of Article 8D of the Conductof General Election Order, 2002 because the petitioner was dismissed from service on 31.8.2000and two years have not been elapsed on 26.8.2002 which was the last date for filing of thenomination paper. In order to substantiate his arguments he also placed on record the revisedschedule of election program.

5. We have considered the arguments put forth by the learned Counsel in the light of rele-vant provisions of law. It will be appropriate to reproduce the operative portion of the impugnedjudgment.

A bare perusal of the above quoted provisions of Legal Framework Order, 2002 would showthat, a person would be disqualified from contesting the election, on the ground of misconductor moral turpitude, which corresponds to the provisions of section 99 (I-A) (i) of the Act, butthe order of 2002, states, that a person shall be disqualified from contesting the election onthe ground of misconduct involving moral turpitude.

In view of the above legal position, we are inclined to subscribe to the contentions of Mr. AshrafKhan Tanoli, Advocate and Mr. K.N. Kohli, learned DAG that the provisions of Article-63(1) (i) of the Legal Framework Order, 2002, are attracted and fully applicable to the case ofrespondent No.I, which lays down that a Candidate stands disqualified from contesting theelections on the ground of ‘ misconduct’ or ‘moral turpitude’. However, since word ‘misconduct’has not been defined in the Act of 1976 or in the Legal Framework Order, 2002, therefore, theonly conclusion which can safely be drawn is; that a person stands disqualified from contestingthe election, if he is found guilty of misconduct; of any type i.e. any forbidden act, unlawfulbehavior, dereliction from duty, dishonest act, etc.

As observed hereinabove, the Notification of dismissal of appellant from service is still holdingthe field, as it has never been challenged before any competent Forum; therefore, it completelystands as barrier against the respondent No.I, from contesting the election, in view of therelevant provisions of law, reproduced hereinabove.

The perusal of above reproduced order shows that the petitioner has been disqualified fromcontesting election in view of Article-63 (1) (i) of the Constitution as incorporated in the LegalFramework Order, 2002. It may be noted that by virtue of Article-4 of the Legal Framework Or-der,2002 reproduced hereinbelow, the amendments made in various Articles of Constitution relatingto the general election are not holding field at present and these will become in force only on suchday as the Chief Executive may, by Notification in the official Gazette, appoint as provided inArticle-4 of the Legal Framework Order for which different days may be appointed in respect ofdifferent provisions by the Chief Executive.


4. Revival of Constitution of 1973.—The provisions of the Constitution as amended bythis Order and by such other Orders as may be promulgated hereinafter, shall stand revivedon such day as the Chief executive may, by Notification in the official Gazette, appoint; anddifferent days may be so appointed in respect of different provisions.

We are, therefore, not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the privaterespondent that the amendments made in the Constitution, by virtue of Article-3 of the LegalFramework Order as regards the general elections being held under The Conduct of General Elec-tions Order, 2002; the petitioner is disqualified in view of the amended Article 63 (1) (i) of theConstitution for the simple reason that within the meaning of Article-4 as yet the requisite Noti-fication in the official gazette for the revival of the Constitution or any amended provisions of theConstitution relating to the disqualification of a candidate to contest the elections has not beenissued, hence the amendment so introduced in the above said Article of the Constitution will notcome into play.

6. We also find force in the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that Conduct of GeneralElection Order, 2002 has over riding effect over the other laws for the time being in force such asThe Representation of People Act, 1976. Article-3 of The General Election Order, 2002 provides asunder:-

3. The provisions of this Order shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in theConstitution or in any other law for the time being in force relating to the forthcoming electionsto the (Senate) National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies.

Similarly Article-10 of The General Election Order, 2002 is reproduced hereunder:-

10. Removal of difficulties.—(1) If any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of the provi-sions of this Order, the President may make such provisions for the removal of the difficultyas he may deem fit.

(2) For the purpose of bringing the provisions of the Constitution and of any of the lawsrelating to elections to the (Senate,) National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies intoaccord with the provisions of this Order, the President may by Order make such adaptations,modifications, additions or omissions as he may deem necessary or expedient.

(3) Any court, tribunal or authority empowered to enforce any of the law referred to in clause(2) shall, notwithstanding that no adaptations have been made in such law by an Order madeunder that clause, construe the law with all such adaptations as are necessary to bring it intoaccord with the provisions of this Order.

Perusal of Article 3 read with sub article (3) of Article 10 shows that The Conduct of GeneralElection Order, 2002 has over riding effect over the other law. As the case of petitioner does notfall within the mischief of any of the disqualification clause of the Order, he cannot be disqualifiedon the strength of any other law which contains a clause inconsistent with that of the Order.

Now coming to the case of petitioner, we have, already held that the petitioner could not bedisqualified under the provisions of the Legal Framework Order which are not applicable at present.

The petitioner was dismissed from service on the ground of willful absence which in our humbleview, does not involve the element of moral turpitude and for disqualifying him under clause 2 (i) ofArticle 8 D of The Conduct of General Election Order, 2002 it is necessary that the dismissal mustinvolve the ingredients of moral turpitude which is wanting/lacking in the present case. Therefore,we are of the considered view that the petitioner was not disqualified to contest the election merelybecause he was dismissed from service on the ground of misconduct resting upon absence from duty.


7. So for as objection regarding maintainability of petition on the ground of alleged absconsionof petitioner is concerned, it will be suffice to observe that the present petition has been filedthrough attorney on the basis of power of attorney duly attested and verified by the office of HighCommissioner of Pakistan at London as provided under the Power of Attorney’s Act read withArticle 95 of the Qanun-e- Shahadat Order. Moreover, we are not inclined to go into this factualcontroversy, particularly when it does not affect the qualification or disqualification of the petitionerunder relevant laws.

8. Reverting to alternate plea advanced during course of arguments that the petitioner was alsodisqualified under sub clause (k) of Clause (2) of Article 8D of The Conduct of General ElectionOrder, 2002, it is suffice to observe that the said ground was never agitated before the learnedElection Tribunal as well as before the Returning Officer. It is worth while to note that the peti-tioner was dismissed from service on 31.08.2000 and two years have already been elapsed on thedate of scrutiny (02.09.2002). Therefore, this additional ground is also not available to the privaterespondent.

In view of the above discussion and reasons the impugned order of the learned Election Tribunalis set aside and declared as of no legal effect. Accordingly; the petitioner is declared to be a validlynominated candidate by granting consequential relief that his nomination papers be processed bythe Returning Officer to the Election Commission of Pakistan through the Provincial ElectionCommissioner enabling him to contest the election from the constituency i.e. PB-23 Kohlu Agencyfor the Balochistan Provincial Assembly.

Announced in open Courton 23.09.2002.

Sd.JUDGE

Sd.CHIEF JUSTICE.

Sd.JUDGE


THIS PAGE BLANK


SECOND ANNUAL JUDICIAL CONFERENCEHIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN

(DECEMBER 13, 2003)


THIS PAGE BLANK


4 ANNUAL JUDICIAL CONFERENCE, HIGH COURT

OF BALOCHISTAN, DECEMBER, 13TH, 2003

Key Note Addressby

Mr. Justice Amanullah Khan, Senior Puisne Judge

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Akhtar Zaman Malghani; Hon’ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Nadir Khan;worthy Registrar; learned Judges of the Subordinate Judiciary of Balochistan; distinguished lawyers;ladies and gentlemen,

Aassalam -o- Alaikum,

It is a proud privilege to welcome all the worthy participants to Balochistan’s Second AnnualJudicial Conference. As the Hon’ble Chief Justice has to attend an important meeting of the Boardof Governors of the Federal Judicial Academy at Islamabad, as such asked me to Preside theConference. The Hon’ble Chief Justice has conveyed his best wishes for the success of the Conference.

The main purpose of this Conference is to enable the judiciary of Balochistan to share theirviewpoint on various issues pertaining to Court functions and to high light the difficulties facedby them while performing their duty. Thus an attempt would be made to bring to limelight, theimpediments, which hampers the progress of the disposal of cases and further to discuss the Lawto improve the working of our judiciary at different levels.

The object of Law is to bring reforms in the judicial system in the province of Balochistan andto achieve speedy and inexpensive justice, throughout the province.

Worthy participants,

I would like to inform you that for the first time in the courts, positive and practical steps havebeen taken to meet the requirements of judiciary at all levels and a large programme i.e ”Strength-ening of Institutional Capacity for Judicial and Legal Reforms” has been initiated, popularly knownas ”Access to Justice Programme” the purpose is to address the problems faced by the judiciary.There is urgent need to build the confidence of general public in the judiciary, as they are directlyaffected from whatever decisions are made. Efforts to be made to minimize the long process oflitigation by expeditious disposal. The conditions prevailing in this province are different from therest of the country, such as illiteracy, long distances, poverty etc. due to which a vast majority ofpeople do not have any access to judiciary in the prevailing circumstances women are the mostaffected. It is a matter of proud for us that despite all the short-comings, our judiciary has a goodrecord of speedy disposal. The High Court is quite aware about the deplorable conditions of ourcourts but efforts are under way for improvement.

Despite lack of proper training in modem techniques in Court and case management, automa-tion of court’s systems including professional management in record keeping systems and courtbudgeting, inadequate judicial training, incompetent legal support, and absence of formal Alter-native Dispute Resolution methodology, compound the issue. The performance of our judiciary isbetter than the courts of other provinces, though there is a lot more to be done for improving theworking conditions.

Distinguished participants, Government’s commitment to reforms coupled with the Asian De-velopment Bank’s support for legal and judicial reforms in Pakistan is emerging as a ray of hope forthe judiciary. Need to make the formal Court system more responsive to the needs of the citizenry,particularly to reduce chronic delays in courts is now being recognized by the government, as one


of its prime priorities. Actions by the Hon’ble Chief Justices’ Committee; administration, monitor-ing and timely instructions for the subordinate Courts and the proceedings of the Pakistan Lawand Justice Commission reviving laws to the betterment according to the changed realities, havedrastically reduced delays relating to timely dispensation of justice in all matters in general, andmore specifically in family matters. Legislation on Small Causes Courts will be introduced to allowcitizens to file cases at less expense using more informal procedures and the Courts to be establishedat Tehsil Level to address the issues at grass root level. This would obviously have beneficial impactin curtailing pendency at upper levels of judicature. Additionally, in order to check the impedimentsin the course of achieving cordial atmosphere in Courts, Bench-Bar Committees; Criminal JusticeCoordination Committees as well as Citizen-Courts Liaison Committees at District levels have beenformulated in the province; so that the real stake holders of the system may participate to havetheir say in day to day affairs affecting them in Courts.

Ladies and gentlemen,

The Asian Development Bank’s funded project on “Strengthening of Institutional Capacity forJudicial and Legal Reform” provides for a short-term technical assistance on pilot basis. It hasintroduced reforms and modern techniques in the judicial system, on pilot basis, that demonstratespracticability within the given system. Series of workshops on Delay Reduction have been heldat various locations in the country, which provided significant training to the Judges on how tomanage case disposals in an effective way. Computers have been provided to the courts in all thefour provincial High Courts and suitable software is being developed for the Courts that will beextremely useful in case flow management and generating daily cause-lists. Under the said Project,the High Courts have also been encouraged to hold judicial conferences, like the one we are holdingtoday. This practice on regular basis, shall in future, also keep the judiciary abreast with the latestdevelopments and achievements in the judicial system.

The Access to Justice Program (AJP) is Asian development Bank’s long-term assistance toPakistan that includes a sustainable legal, judicial and police reforms, which on its proper imple-mentation, it is anticipated, would have healthy impact on overall performance of the Courts, whilethe Judges too would have congenial atmosphere both by way of infrastructure and facilities, andobviously with the able assistance of the bar, the menace of large and long pendency would be keptin check.

Worthy participants,

However, while we strive to achieve the prime object of our noble institution, I must congratulatethe members of the subordinate judiciary for their dedication and untiring efforts that had lead usto a level of minimum pendency as compared to all the other subordinate Courts of the country andI do expect all of you to keep up the good work. With this, I conclude my address, but before that,I would like to thank the distinguished participants, who have join us here today and are expectedto make valuable contribution in the Conference proceedings. Lastly, I pray to Almighty Allah, tolead us to make this programme a success.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen.


JUDICIAL ACTIVITY 2003


THIS PAGE BLANK


THE HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN(JUDICIAL ACTIVITY)


THIS PAGE BLANK


5 THE HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN:

JUDICIAL ACTIVITY DURING 2003

5.1 Consolidated Statement for High Court of Balochistan

Institution Disposal PendingPendency on 01.01.2003 01.01.2003 Balance on

Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003Principal Seat 2,731 3,562 6,293 3,974 2,319Sibi Bench 348 490 838 580 258Grand Total 3,079 4,052 7,131 4,554 2,577

Pendency, Institution and Disposal of Cases in High Court of

Balochistan

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,5005,000

PrincipalSeat

SibiBench

Total

PENDING ON 1.1.3

INSTITUTION FROM 1.1.03 TO31.12.03 DISPOSAL FROM 1.1.03 TO31.12.03


5.2 High Court of Balochistan, Principal Seat at Quetta: StatementShowing Category-wise Pendency, Institution and Disposal ofCases for the Year, 2003

Institution DisposalPendency on 01.01.2003 01.01.2003 Balance on

Category of Cases 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003Constitution Petition (DB) 510 647 1,157 651 506Criminal Revision (SB/DB) 65 181 246 161 85Habeas Corpus Petition (DB) 1 0 1 0 1Civil Revision (SB/DB) 558 353 911 400 511Civil Petition U/C Act 4 0 4 2 2Criminal Misc: Quashment 18 51 69 45 24Criminal Bail Application 31 241 272 229 43Suit for Recovery of Loans 0 0 0 0 0Original Suit 1 1 2 2 0Execution Application 5 2 7 6 1Contempt Application 12 28 40 15 25Review Petition/Appeal 3 9 12 12 0Election Petition/Appeals 15 4 19 4 15Civil/Criminal Transfer Application 16 34 50 28 22Suo Moto Reference 0 3 3 3 0Insolvency Petition/Appeal 0 0 0 0 0Criminal Civil Original Complaint 1 0 1 0 1Murder Reference 15 29 44 15 29Admirality Suit 0 0 0 0 0Criminal Appeal/Jail Appeal 458 497 955 536 419High Court Appeal 36 15 51 19 32Regular First Appeal 152 84 236 35 201Regular Second Appeal 11 2 13 3 10First Appeal Orders 104 72 176 123 53Succession Appeal 2 0 2 2 0Civil Misc. Appeal 12 26 38 24 14Custom Appeal 15 24 39 13 26Criminal Reference 0 0 0 0 0Family Appeal 4 0 4 1 3Guardian Appeal 1 1 2 1 1Admirality Appeal 0 0 0 0 0Special Criminal Banking Appeal 3 0 3 0 3Criminal Ehtisab Appeal 101 17 118 37 81Income Tax Appeal 17 3 20 0 20Inter Court Appeal 1 0 1 1 0Sales Tax Appeal 4 1 5 0 5Civil Misc. Application 80 1,087 1,167 1,145 22Criminal Appeal (ATA) 145 71 216 88 128I.R.O 244 1 245 245 0Labour Appeal 86 65 151 115 36Cr. Misc. Application 0 13 13 13 0Total 2,731 3,562 6,293 3,974 2,319


5.3 High Court of Balochistan, Bench at Sibi: Statement ShowingCategory-wise Pendency, Institution and Disposal of Cases for theYear, 2003

Institution DisposalPendency on 01.01.2003 01.01.2003 Balance on

Category of Cases 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003Murder Reference 17 15 32 7 25Criminal Appeal/Crl: Acq Appeal 97 119 216 154 62Criminal Revision 15 28 43 18 25Criminal Jail Appeal 43 59 102 63 39Transfer Application 0 10 10 10 0Bail Application 5 69 74 74 0Criminal Misc. Quashment 12 5 17 17 0Habeas Corpus 1 2 3 3 0Civil Appeal 6 3 9 8 1Civil Revision 32 47 79 66 13R.F.A. 8 1 9 6 3R.S.A 0 1 1 0 1C.P. 53 85 138 95 43Contempt Application 2 5 7 7 0F.A.O. 1 1 2 2 0Criminal Reference 0 0 0 0 0Suo Moto Reference 0 0 0 0 0ATA Murder Reference 19 8 27 10 17ATA Appeal 35 15 50 31 19Criminal Jail Revision 2 7 9 8 1Custom Appeal 0 1 1 1 0High Court Appeal 0 4 4 0 4ATA Jail Appeal 0 5 5 0 5Total 348 490 838 580 258


THIS PAGE BLANK


THE SUBORDINATE JUDICIARYOF BALOCHISTAN

(JUDICIAL ACTIVITY)


THIS PAGE BLANK


6 THE SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY OF

BALOCHISTAN: JUDICIAL ACTIVITY DURING 2003

6.1 Consolidated Statement for the Entire Subordinate Judiciary ofBalochistan


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003Quetta 2384 7657 10041 7644 2397Pishin 256 1257 1513 1226 287Loralai 179 1487 1666 1470 196Zhob 162 529 691 624 67Sibi 379 1613 1992 1573 419Usta Muhammad 132 461 593 468 125Dera Allah Yar 200 852 1052 781 271Dera Murad Jamali 166 684 850 689 161Mussa Khail 16 136 152 142 10Khuzdar 114 1519 1633 1444 189Kalat 179 1089 1268 1043 225Nushki 100 576 676 549 127Turbat 445 2323 2768 2168 600Hub 257 933 1190 888 302Kharan 166 613 779 550 229Grand Total 5135 21729 26864 21259 5605

Institution Disposal & Pendency during 2003

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Quetta

Pishin

Loralai Zhob Sibi

Usta Mu

hammad

Dera Al

lah Yar

Dera M

urad Jam

ali

Mussa K

hail

Khuzda

r

Kalat

Nushki

Turbat Hub Kha

ranInstitution

Disposal

Balance


6.2 Consolidated Statement for Sessions Courts Balochistan


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003Quetta 773 2476 3249 2576 673Pishin 132 493 625 529 96Loralai 59 323 382 309 73Zhob 58 206 264 236 28Sibi 221 633 854 607 247Usta Muhammad 90 221 311 221 90Dera Allah Yar 64 432 496 405 91Dera Murad Jamali 99 324 423 347 76Musa Khail 7 30 37 37 0Khuzdar 9 214 223 196 27Kalat 102 249 351 260 91Nushki 27 126 153 119 34Turbat 99 451 550 406 144Hub 108 491 599 429 170Kharan 10 83 93 81 12Grand Total 1858 6752 8610 6758 1852

6.3 Consolidated Statement for Civil Judges, Judicial Magistrates andQazis

(SCJ=Senior Civil Judge, CJ=Civil Judge, JM=Judicial Magistrate, MMS=Member Majlis-e-Shoora)


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003Quetta 1611 5181 6792 5068 1724Pishin 124 764 888 697 191Loralai 120 1164 1284 1161 123Zhob 104 323 427 388 39Sibi 158 980 1138 966 172Usta Muhammad 42 240 282 247 35Dera Allah Yar 136 420 556 376 180Dera Murad Jamali 67 360 427 342 85Mussa Khail 9 106 115 105 10Khuzdar 105 1305 1410 1248 162Kalat 77 840 917 783 134Nushki 73 450 523 430 93Turbat 346 1872 2218 1762 456Hub 149 442 591 459 132Kharan 156 530 686 469 217Grand Total 3277 14977 18254 14501 3753


6.4 Statements Showing Category-wise Pendency, Institution and Dis-posal of Cases for the Subordinate Judiciary for the Year, 2003

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

3536

3738

3940

4142

4344

45

Sessions Cases P.P.C

Murder Cases

Qisas & Diyat

S.T.A.

Arms STA

Murder STA

C.N.S

Hadd Cases

Prohibation

Hadood Cases

Complaint

Arms Cases

Explosive

39 Act

Foreign Exchange Act

Criminal Appeal

Criminal Revision

Customs Cases

Gambling Act

Minor Act

F.I.A.

Anti:Dist Police

Civil Suit

Family Cases

Family Appeal

Arbitration

Insolvency

Rent

Succession

Guardian

Execution

Civil Appeal

Civil Revisions

Land Acq:

Eviction

Miscellaneous

Others

Contempt Appeal

Election petition

I.R.O, 1969

W.P. Shops

Weight & M, 1977

Payment of Wages

Factrories Act

Total

Previous Pending. 617

246658

2215

47151

9133

25952

19812

06

4239

74

90

01168

20426

3411

3557

26252

22627

291

17471

2122

4270

5810

05135

Institution2810

4972704

2214

17609

20382

674986

6077

827

548339

5116

19011

123625

948157

184

111566

113839

1138152

9172

1561760

2214

342552

1910

121729

Total3427

7433362

4429

64760

294115

9331038

80519

833

590378

5820

19911

124793

1152183

5215

146623

13910911364

17911

2631735

83143

36384

622249

101

26864

Disposal 2762

5062817

3223

55593

22863

694991

57111

428

528333

2218

16411

03454

902125

1613

116572

109775

1111154

5193

1521753

1031

145573

21610

121259

Total665

237545

126

9167

6652

23947

2348

45

6245

362

350

121339

25058

362

3051

30316

25325

670

21478

335

23949

330

05605

PENDENCY OF CASES IN SUBORDINATE COURTS DURING THE YEAR, 2003 OF BALOCHISTAN PROVINCE


12

34

56

78

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Sessio

ns D

ivisions


Murder Cases

Qisas & Diyat

S.T.A.

Arms STA

Murder STA

C.N.S

Hadd Cases

Prohibation

Hadood Cases

Complaint

Arms Cases

Explosive

39 Act


Criminal Appeal

Criminal Revision

Customs Cases

Gambling Act

Minor Act

F.I.A.

Anti:Dist Police

Civil Suit

Family Cases

Family Appeal

Arbitration

Insolvency

Rent

Succession

Guardian

Execution

Civil Appeal

Civil Revisions

Land Acq:

Eviction

Miscellaneous

Others

Contempt Appeal

Election petition

I.R.O, 1969

W.P. Shops

Weight & M, 1977

Payment of Wages

Factrories Act

Total

Quetta

301

39

193

30

092

21

056

16

55

54

018

18

25

013

04

570

79

19

31

224

16

28

178

129

21

664

57

17

60

207

47

33

00

2397

Pish

in41

357

00

07

00

90

12

00

30

10

02

00

65

51

40

00

019

00

03

20

30

50

00

00

0287

Lora

lai

25

17

13

00

01

80

41

60

00

49

01

10

056

70

00

24

119

91

00

51

01

00

00

0196

Zhob

43

10

02

30

00

02

00

01

00

00

00

33

11

00

01

04

50

00

60

00

00

00

067

Khuzd

ar

31

521

01

25

60

90

90

00

40

00

00

054

95

00

10

015

10

00

02

00

00

00

00

189

Kala

t27

19

30

62

31

12

16

811

10

00

23

00

08

27

32

50

00

60

62

00

07

00

00

00

00

225

Nush

ki19

09

00

07

30

00

60

01

40

00

19

00

34

31

00

00

08

02

02

30

60

00

00

0127

Turb

at

48

21

70

30

22

15

21

616

00

110

72

00

00

200

74

20

00

27

038

34

00

029

24

02

00

00

0600

Hub

36

535

00

021

32

14

014

00

03

05

00

00

39

22

00

13

19

14

00

043

016

032

20

00

302

Khara

n3

39

00

00

20

01

10

00

-14

00

00

0142

31

00

00

00

710

00

012

50

00

00

00

229

Sib

i53

52

59

00

01

15

16

40

944

20

013

01

10

00

58

31

00

010

05

19

00

116

00

00

00

00

419

Usta

Moham

mad

15

26

13

00

10

11

15

020

00

03

10

00

00

11

12

10

01

04

61

00

20

00

00

00

0125

Dera

Alla

h Y

ar

34

19

79

30

17

323

40

229

00

01

10

00

00

14

10

00

01

03

60

00

40

00

00

00

0271

Dera

Mura

d Ja

mali

26

25

19

00

00

23

15

09

00

02

20

00

00

32

21

00

02

01

90

00

81

02

00

00

0161

Musa

Khail

20

00

00

00

00

40

00

00

00

00

00

40

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

10

Tota

l665

237

545

12

69

167

66

52

239

47

234

84

562

45

36

235

012

1339

250

58

36

230

51

30

316

253

25

670

214

78

33

5239

49

33

00

5605

PE

ND

EN

CY

OF

CA

SE

S IN

SU

BO

RD

INA

TE

CO

UR

TS

DU

RIN

G T

HE

YE

AR

, 2003 OF

BA

LO

CH

IST

AN

PR

OV

INC

E


12

34

56

78

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Desig

natio

n o

f Pre

sidin

g

Office

r


Murder Cases

Qisas & Diyat

S.T.A.

Arms STA

Murder STA

C.N.S

Hadd Cases

Prohibation

Hadood Cases

Complaint

Arms Cases

Explosive

39 Act


Criminal Appeal

Criminal Revision

Customs Cases

Gambling Act

Minor Act

F.I.A.

Anti:Dist Police

Civil Suit

Family Cases

Family Appeal

Arbitration

Insolvency

Rent

Succession

Guardian

Execution

Civil Appeal

Civil Revisions

Land Acq:

Eviction

Miscellaneous

Others

Contempt Appeal

Election petition

I.R.O, 1969

W.P. Shops

Weight & M, 1977

Payment of Wages

Factrories Act

Total

Pendin

g260

30

347

93

474

42

064

25

66

90

512

13

50

00

0526

93

12

31

11

24

35

23

169

92

22

274

77

43

20

42

70

58

10

02384

Institu

tion

988

31

787

21

3234

45

0104

724

140

05

11

139

117

27

758

11

41084

333

49

12

368

250

90

286

420

105

996

180

324

60

193

549

162

00

7657

Tota

l1248

61

1134

11

47

308

87

0168

749

206

95

16

151

130

32

758

11

41610

426

61

43

14

92

285

113

455

512

127

11

170

257

367

80

235

619

220

10

010041

Disp

osa

l947

22

941

84

7216

66

0112

733

151

41

16

133

112

77

45

11

01040

347

42

12

12

68

269

85

277

383

106

5106

200

350

20

28

572

187

10

07644

Bala

nce

301

39

193

30

092

21

056

16

55

54

018

18

25

013

04

570

79

19

31

224

16

28

178

129

21

664

57

17

60

207

47

33

00

2397

Pendin

g27

14

49

11

15

00

16

07

00

01

10

00

00

35

10

30

04

08

38

10

63

15

118

00

00

0256

Institu

tion

162

12

297

01

050

10

33

241

00

413

12

00

29

00

95

28

54

00

24

739

22

17

07

167

180

50

00

00

01257

Tota

l189

26

346

12

155

10

49

248

00

414

13

00

29

00

130

29

57

00

28

747

60

18

013

170

195

618

00

00

01513

Disp

osa

l148

23

289

12

148

10

40

236

00

114

12

00

27

00

65

24

43

00

28

728

60

18

010

150

165

118

00

00

01226

Bala

nce

41

357

00

07

00

90

12

00

30

10

02

00

65

51

40

00

019

00

03

20

30

50

00

00

0287

Pendin

g36

10

70

00

06

05

18

00

09

70

01

00

69

10

00

30

04

60

00

21

03

00

00

0179

Institu

tion

295

41

141

00

026

28

015

836

21

047

32

14

20

00

257

37

00

09

23

366

67

50

23

261

37

02

00

00

01487

Tota

l331

51

148

00

026

34

020

944

21

056

39

14

21

00

326

38

00

012

23

370

73

50

23

263

38

05

00

00

01666

Disp

osa

l306

34

135

00

025

26

016

838

21

052

30

13

20

00

270

31

00

010

19

251

64

40

23

258

37

04

00

00

01470

Bala

nce

25

17

13

00

01

80

41

60

00

49

01

10

056

70

00

24

119

91

00

51

01

00

00

0196

Pendin

g61

14

10

20

24

110

14

35

00

00

10

00

00

27

00

00

31

02

11

00

00

00

00

00

0162

Institu

tion

69

728

00

038

00

33

712

00

016

90

00

00

59

41

00

941

017

18

40

0118

39

00

00

00

0529

Tota

l130

21

38

20

242

110

47

10

17

00

016

10

00

00

086

41

00

12

42

019

19

50

0118

39

00

00

00

0691

Disp

osa

l126

18

37

20

039

110

47

10

15

00

015

10

00

00

053

30

00

12

41

015

14

50

0112

39

00

00

00

0624

Bala

nce

43

10

02

30

00

02

00

01

00

00

00

33

11

00

01

04

50

00

60

00

00

00

067

PE

ND

EN

CY

OF

CA

SE

S IN

SU

BO

RD

INA

TE

CO

UR

TS

FO

R T

HE

YE

AR

, 20

03

OF

BA

LO

CH

IST

AN

PR

OV

INC

E

Qu

etta

Dis

trict

Pis

hin

Dis

trict

Lo

rala

i Dis

trict

Zh

ob

Dis

trict


12

34

56

78

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Desig

natio

n o

f Pre

sidin

g

Office

r


Murder Cases

Qisas & Diyat

S.T.A.

Arms STA

Murder STA

C.N.S

Hadd Cases

Prohibation

Hadood Cases

Complaint

Arms Cases

Explosive

39 Act


Criminal Appeal

Criminal Revision

Customs Cases

Gambling Act

Minor Act

F.I.A.

Anti:Dist Police

Civil Suit

Family Cases

Family Appeal

Arbitration

Insolvency

Rent

Succession

Guardian

Execution

Civil Appeal

Civil Revisions

Land Acq:

Eviction

Miscellaneous

Others

Contempt Appeal

Election petition

I.R.O, 1969

W.P. Shops

Weight & M, 1977

Payment of Wages

Factrories Act

Total

Kh

uzd

ar D

istric

t

Pendin

g15

510

00

02

00

40

40

00

00

00

30

044

40

00

00

015

80

00

00

00

00

00

0114

Institu

tion

182

35

176

23

426

12

118

221

00

045

16

20

00

0460

100

22

00

310

4111

108

00

0136

19

00

00

00

01518

Tota

l197

40

186

23

428

12

122

225

00

045

16

20

30

0504

104

22

00

310

4126

116

00

0136

19

00

00

00

01632

Disp

osa

l166

35

165

22

223

61

13

216

00

041

16

20

30

0450

95

17

00

210

4111

106

00

0134

19

00

00

00

01443

Bala

nce

31

521

01

25

60

90

90

00

40

00

00

054

95

00

10

015

10

00

02

00

00

00

00

189

Kala

t Dis

trict

Pendin

g11

20

22

00

72

12

026

28

00

04

30

00

00

42

50

00

02

06

70

00

00

00

00

00

0179

Institu

tion

155

48

146

74

029

11

243

36

16

10

120

13

50

00

8229

64

14

00

026

041

79

00

090

10

00

00

00

1089

Tota

l166

68

168

74

731

23

269

38

24

10

124

16

50

00

8271

69

14

00

028

047

86

00

090

10

00

00

00

1268

Disp

osa

l139

49

138

12

430

22

053

30

13

00

124

14

20

00

0244

37

90

00

22

041

84

00

083

10

00

00

00

1043

Bala

nce

27

19

30

62

31

12

16

811

10

00

23

00

08

27

32

50

00

60

62

00

07

00

00

00

00

225

Nu

sh

ki D

istric

t

Pendin

g8

422

00

08

00

05

10

00

00

00

50

022

24

00

00

07

10

06

30

11

00

00

0100

Institu

tion

44

12

57

00

023

80

011

11

21

10

26

11

20

81

00

122

22

40

00

40

22

28

60

38

22

09

00

00

00

576

Tota

l52

16

79

00

031

80

016

12

21

10

26

11

20

86

00

144

24

80

00

40

29

29

60

44

25

010

10

00

00

676

Disp

osa

l33

16

70

00

024

50

016

62

19

22

11

20

67

00

110

21

70

00

40

21

29

40

42

22

04

10

00

00

549

Bala

nce

19

09

00

07

30

00

60

01

40

00

19

00

34

31

00

00

08

02

02

30

60

00

00

0127

Dis

trict T

urb

at

Pendin

g38

15

18

00

024

04

13

312

00

18

31

00

00

186

74

60

02

32

910

00

43

60

00

00

00

445

Institu

tion

264

30

103

04

079

97

43

14

69

00

161

31

31

00

0598

200

42

00

768

0157

175

00

0228

125

04

00

00

02323

Tota

l302

45

121

04

0103

911

56

17

81

00

269

34

41

00

0784

274

48

00

971

2166

185

00

4231

131

04

00

00

02768

Disp

osa

l254

24

114

01

081

86

35

11

65

00

159

27

21

00

0584

200

28

00

764

2128

151

00

4202

107

02

00

00

02168

Bala

nce

48

21

70

30

22

15

21

616

00

110

72

00

00

200

74

20

00

27

038

34

00

029

24

02

00

00

0600

PE

ND

EN

CY

OF

CA

SE

S IN

SU

BO

RD

INA

TE

CO

UR

TS

FO

R T

HE

YE

AR

, 20

03

OF

BA

LO

CH

IST

AN

PR

OV

INC

E


12

34

56

78

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Desig

natio

n o

f Pre

sidin

g

Office

r


Murder Cases

Qisas & Diyat

S.T.A.

Arms STA

Murder STA

C.N.S

Hadd Cases

Prohibation

Hadood Cases

Complaint

Arms Cases

Explosive

39 Act


Criminal Appeal

Criminal Revision

Customs Cases

Gambling Act

Minor Act

F.I.A.

Anti:Dist Police

Civil Suit

Family Cases

Family Appeal

Arbitration

Insolvency

Rent

Succession

Guardian

Execution

Civil Appeal

Civil Revisions

Land Acq:

Eviction

Miscellaneous

Others

Contempt Appeal

Election petition

I.R.O, 1969

W.P. Shops

Weight & M, 1977

Payment of Wages

Factrories Act

Total

Dis

trict H

ub

Pendin

g38

518

00

030

18

30

40

00

00

01

00

045

50

00

21

19

20

00

67

116

00

00

00

257

Institu

tion

66

10

166

00

068

73

23

440

00

039

15

70

00

0100

33

31

011

18

325

54

10

053

00

1149

329

01

933

Tota

l104

15

184

00

098

811

26

444

00

039

15

71

00

0145

38

31

013

19

434

56

10

0120

116

1149

329

01

1190

Disp

osa

l68

10

149

00

077

59

12

430

00

036

15

21

00

0106

36

11

012

16

325

42

10

077

10

1117

129

01

888

Bala

nce

36

535

00

021

32

14

014

00

03

05

00

00

39

22

00

13

19

14

00

043

016

032

20

00

302

Kh

ara

n D

istric

t

Pendin

g9

18

00

01

00

01

20

00

11

00

00

084

14

10

00

10

917

00

014

20

00

00

00

166

Institu

tion

35

371

00

05

50

45

40

00

10

14

00

00

0217

47

50

00

90

34

57

00

068

20

00

00

00

0613

Tota

l44

479

00

06

50

46

60

00

11

15

00

00

0301

61

60

00

10

043

74

00

082

22

00

00

00

0779

Disp

osa

l41

170

00

06

30

45

50

00

12

11

00

00

0159

30

60

00

10

036

64

00

070

17

00

00

00

0550

Bala

nce

33

90

00

02

00

11

00

0-1

40

00

00

142

31

00

00

00

710

00

012

50

00

00

00

229

Dis

trict S

ibi

Pendin

g37

33

71

810

25

016

360

10

29

30

05

61

10

00

32

00

00

02

00

21

30

12

00

00

00

00

379

Institu

tion

193

84

298

31

46

16

24

189

110

62

20

064

21

21

00

0241

35

30

13

55

217

60

50

4107

00

00

00

00

1613

Tota

l230

117

369

11

11

29

632

27

249

120

91

50

069

27

32

00

0273

35

30

13

57

217

81

80

5109

00

00

00

00

1992

Disp

osa

l177

65

310

11

11

29

517

11

209

111

47

30

056

27

21

00

0215

32

20

13

47

212

62

80

493

00

00

00

00

1573

Bala

nce

53

52

59

00

01

15

16

40

944

20

013

01

10

00

58

31

00

010

05

19

00

116

00

00

00

00

419

Pendin

g17

30

13

00

40

21

15

021

00

01

00

00

00

11

30

00

03

05

60

00

00

00

00

00

0132

Institu

tion

48

46

71

00

00

35

14

30

052

00

038

25

00

00

026

18

21

01

60

12

55

04

13

22

50

00

00

461

Tota

l65

76

84

00

40

37

15

45

073

00

039

25

00

00

037

21

21

01

90

17

11

50

413

22

50

00

00

593

Disp

osa

l50

50

71

00

30

36

14

30

053

00

036

24

00

00

026

20

00

01

80

13

54

04

11

22

50

00

00

468

Bala

nce

15

26

13

00

10

11

15

020

00

03

10

00

00

11

12

10

01

04

61

00

20

00

00

00

0125

PE

ND

EN

CY

OF

CA

SE

S IN

SU

BO

RD

INA

TE

CO

UR

TS

FO

R T

HE

YE

AR

, 20

03

OF

BA

LO

CH

IST

AN

PR

OV

INC

E

Us

ta M

uh

am

ma

d D

istric

t


12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

3536

3738

3940

4142

4344

45

Designation of P

residing O

fficer


Murder Cases

Qisas & Diyat

S.T.A.

Arms STA

Murder STA

C.N.S

Hadd Cases

Prohibation

Hadood Cases

Complaint

Arms Cases

Explosive

39 Act


Criminal Appeal

Criminal Revision

Customs Cases

Gambling Act

Minor Act

F.I.A.

Anti:Dist Police

Civil Suit

Family Cases

Family Appeal

Arbitration

Insolvency

Rent

Succession

Guardian

Execution

Civil Appeal

Civil Revisions

Land Acq:

Eviction

Miscellaneous

Others

Contempt Appeal

Election petition

I.R.O, 1969

W.P. Shops

Weight & M, 1977

Payment of Wages

Factrories Act

Total

Pending

3417

532

14

14

626

06

00

01

20

20

00

232

20

00

20

48

00

00

00

00

00

00

200

Institution83

54257

60

320

1425

875

620

00

2414

22

00

025

95

00

020

46

193

00

9112

00

00

00

0852

Total117

71310

81

721

1831

1135

680

00

2516

24

00

048

117

00

022

410

273

00

9112

00

00

00

01052

Disposal

8352

2315

16

1415

873

339

00

024

152

40

00

3410

70

00

214

721

30

087

120

00

00

00

781

Balance

3419

793

01

73

2340

229

00

01

10

00

00

141

00

00

10

36

00

04

00

00

00

00

271

Pending

2345

100

00

06

111

022

00

00

20

00

00

220

10

01

20

59

00

02

31

00

00

00

166

Institution203

81106

20

33

116

520

350

10

68

01

20

083

152

00

010

06

240

00

211

02

00

00

0684

Total226

126116

20

33

177

630

570

10

610

01

20

0105

153

00

112

011

330

00

234

12

00

00

0850

Disposal

200101

972

03

315

448

048

01

04

80

12

00

7313

20

01

100

1024

00

015

31

00

00

00

689

Balance

2625

190

00

02

315

09

00

02

20

00

00

322

10

00

20

19

00

08

10

20

00

00

161

Pending

33

00

00

01

02

23

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

10

00

00

01

00

00

00

00

16

Institution23

30

00

02

10

058

60

00

01

00

00

029

30

00

02

00

21

00

60

00

00

00

0137

Total26

60

00

02

20

260

90

00

01

00

00

029

30

00

03

00

21

00

70

00

00

00

0153

Disposal

246

00

00

22

02

569

00

00

10

00

00

253

00

00

30

02

10

07

00

00

00

00

143

Balance

20

00

00

00

00

40

00

00

00

00

00

40

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

10

PEND

ENC

Y OF C

ASES IN

SUB

OR

DIN

ATE C

OU

RTS FO

R TH

E YEAR

, 2003 OF B

ALO

CH

ISTAN

PRO

VINC

E

District D

era Allah Yar

District D

era Murad Jam

ali

Musa K

hail District


6.5 District-wise Consolidated Statements for the Subordinate Judi-ciary


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003QUETTA

Sessions Judge Quetta 89 192 281 193 88Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Quetta 13 21 34 22 12Additional Sessions Judge-I Quetta 123 306 429 375 54Additional Sessions Judge-II Quetta 89 245 334 221 113Additional Sessions Judge-III Quetta 134 302 436 333 103Additional Sessions Judge-IV Quetta 67 333 400 319 81Additional Sessions Judge-V Quetta 102 266 368 257 111Senior Civil Judge-I Quetta 182 353 535 302 233Senior Civil Judge-II Quetta 224 196 420 205 215Civil Judge-II Quetta 199 513 712 433 279Civil Judge-III Quetta 165 451 616 463 153Civil Judge-IV Quetta 178 185 363 334 29Civil Judge-V Quetta 143 636 779 494 285Judicial Magistrate-I Quetta 93 339 432 336 96Judicial Magistrate-II Quetta 43 286 329 252 77Judicial Magistrate-III Quetta 77 441 518 460 58Judicial Magistrate-IV Quetta 66 1080 1146 1061 85Judicial Magistrate-V Quetta 98 365 463 374 89Judicial Magistrate Ziarat 1 21 22 21 1Special Judge Anticorruption 60 39 99 60 39P.O Ist Labour Court 93 723 816 774 42Accountability Court-I Quetta 1 10 11 7 4Accountability Court-II Quetta 2 17 19 15 4Additional Magistrate-1 Quetta 48 1 49 49 0Additional Magistrate-II Quetta 56 111 167 95 72Judicial Magistrate-VI Quetta 38 189 227 189 38Civil Judge-I Quetta 0 14 14 0 14Chairman Drug Court 0 22 22 0 22Grand Total 2384 7657 10041 7644 2397


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003PISHIN

Sessions Judge Pishin 84 259 343 285 58Additional Sessions Judge Pishin 48 234 282 244 38Senior Civil Judge Pishin 33 155 188 136 52Judicial Magistrate Pishin 13 271 284 262 22Civil Judge Chaman 16 69 85 42 43Judicial Magistrate Chaman 57 220 277 214 63Judicial Magistrate Khanozai 3 18 21 15 6Judicial Magistrate Barshore 0 8 8 7 1Judicial Magistrate Killa Abdullah 2 23 25 21 4Grand Total 256 1257 1513 1226 287



Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003LORALAI

Sessions Judge Loralai 59 323 382 309 73Civil Judge Loralai 29 91 120 84 36Judicial Magistrate Loralai 12 373 385 377 8Judicial Magistrate Duki/Sanjavi 7 50 57 53 4Judicial Magistrate Barkhan 12 196 208 204 4Judicial Magistrate Killa Saif Ullah 6 37 43 43 0Judicial Magistrate Muslim Bagh 1 44 45 36 9Majlis-e-Shoora Loralai 4 62 66 54 12Majlis-e-Shoora Barkhan 1 15 16 14 2Qazi Killa Saifullah 1 6 7 7 0Qazi Muslim Bagh 3 51 54 36 18Qazi Bori/Sanjavi 20 91 111 85 26Qazi Barkhan 24 148 172 168 4Grand Total 179 1487 1666 1470 196


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003ZHOB

Sessions Judge Zhob 58 206 264 236 28Judicial Magistrate Zhob 55 228 283 276 7Judicial Magistrate Sherani 23 9 32 31 1Majlis-e-Shoora Zhob 21 27 48 30 18Qazi Zhob 5 59 64 51 13Grand Total 162 529 691 624 67


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003KHUZDAR

Sessions Judge Khuzdar 4 177 181 157 24Additional Sessions Judge Khuzdar 5 37 42 39 3Judicial Magistrate Khuzdar 1 172 173 124 49Judicial Magistrate Awaran 2 57 59 55 4Additional Judicial Magistrate Khuzdar 0 178 178 178 0Majlis-e-Shoora Khuzdar 12 126 138 120 18Qazi Khuzdar 38 282 320 242 78Additional Qazi Khuzdar 42 138 180 180 0Qazi Awaran 0 208 208 201 7Qazi Mashkai 10 144 154 148 6Grand Total 114 1519 1633 1444 189


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003KALAT AT MASTUNG

Sessions Judge Mastung 63 169 232 157 75Additional Sessions Judge Mastung 39 80 119 103 16Judicial Magistrate Mastung 7 134 141 126 15


Judicial Magistrate Kalat 7 110 117 97 20Judicial Magistrate Dasht 3 18 21 13 8Judicial Magistrate Soorab 0 56 56 52 4Majlis-e-Shoora Kalat at Mastung 8 87 95 94 1Qazi Sarawan 9 111 120 109 11Qazi Soorab 14 166 180 155 25Qazi Kalat 29 132 161 132 29Qazi Dasht Mastung 0 26 26 5 21Grand Total 179 1089 1268 1043 225


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003NUSHKI

Sessions Judge Nushki 27 126 153 119 34Civil Judge Nushki 17 51 68 55 13Judicial Magistrate Nushki 17 62 79 66 13Judicial Magistrate Dalbandin 9 60 69 66 3Judicial Magistrate Taftan 2 36 38 31 7Majlis-e-Shoora Nushki 6 17 23 18 5Qazi Dalbandin 22 224 246 194 52Grand Total 100 576 676 549 127


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003TURBAT

Sessions Judge Turbat 83 271 354 244 110Additional Sessions Judge Turbat 0 0 0 0 0Additional Sessions Judge Panjgoor 16 180 196 162 34Judicial Magistrate Turbat 20 141 161 130 31Judicial Magistrate Panjgoor 18 145 163 149 14Judicial Magistrate Gawadar 3 71 74 70 4Judicial Magistrate Tump 13 29 42 41 1Judicial Magistrate Pasni 2 73 75 65 10Majlis-e-Shoora Turbat 28 155 183 139 44Majlis-e-Shoora Turbat at Panjgoor 11 29 40 32 8Qazi Turbat 103 338 441 354 87Qazi Gawadar 38 290 328 237 91Qazi Panjgoor 34 165 199 150 49Qazi Tump 17 124 141 120 21Qazi Pasni 8 133 141 112 29Qazi Dasht 10 25 35 26 9Qazi Dasht at Turbat 41 154 195 137 58Grand Total 445 2323 2768 2168 600


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003HUB

Sessions Judge Hub 9 253 262 196 66Additional Sessions Judge Hub 27 55 82 65 17P.O. IIIrd Labour Court Hub 72 183 255 168 87


Judicial Magistrate Hub 66 118 184 128 56Judicial Magistrate Bela 14 78 92 83 9Civil Judge Hub 30 70 100 82 18Majlis-e-Shoora Lasbella 2 51 53 42 11Qazi Lasbella at Uthal 37 125 162 124 38Grand Total 257 933 1190 888 302


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003KHARAN

Sessions Judge Kharan 10 83 93 81 12Judicial Magistrate Kharan 11 56 67 63 4Judicial Magistrate Basima 5 44 49 43 6Judicial Magistrate Mashkail 3 23 26 20 6Majlis-e-Shoora Kharan 18 66 84 73 11Qazi Kharan 104 277 381 202 179Qazi Basima 15 64 79 68 11Grand Total 166 613 779 550 229


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003USTA MUHAMMAD

Sessions Judge Usta Mohammad 90 221 311 221 90Judicial Magistrate Usta Mohammad 26 124 150 135 15Civil Judge Usta Mohammad 16 116 132 112 20Grand Total 132 461 593 468 125


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003MUSA KHAIL

Sessions Judge Mussa Khail 7 30 37 37 0Judicial Magistrate Musa Khail 6 76 82 76 6Majlis-e-Shoora Musa Khail 0 7 7 7 0Qazi Musa Khail 3 23 26 22 4Grand Total 16 136 152 142 10


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003SIBI

Sessions Judge Sibi 120 216 336 279 57Additional Sessions Judge-1 Sibi 83 152 235 177 58P.O. IInd Labour Court Sibi 18 118 136 70 66Senior Civil Judge Sibi 10 92 102 91 11Judicial Magistrate Sibi 34 266 300 227 73Judicial Magistrate Harnai 10 61 71 67 4Judicial Magistrate Kholu 7 55 62 61 1Judicial Magistrate Dhadar 21 56 77 69 8Judicial Magistrate Bhag 19 92 111 107 4


Judicial Magistrate Mach 6 56 62 53 9Civil Judge Mach 2 17 19 13 6Civil Judge Hernai 1 11 12 10 2Judicial Magistrate Sui 3 15 18 8 10Additional Sessions Judge-II Sibi 0 147 147 81 66Majlis-e-Shoora Sibi 14 26 40 25 15Qazi Lehri at Dhader 4 52 56 47 9Qazi Kohlu 23 139 162 148 14Qazi Bhag 4 42 46 40 6Qazi Dera Bughti 0 0 0 0 0Grand Total 379 1613 1992 1573 419


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003DERA ALLAH YAR

Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar 35 385 420 341 79Additional Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar 29 47 76 64 12Judicial Magistrate Dera Allah Yar 115 344 459 287 172Senior Civil Judge Dera Allah Yar 21 76 97 89 8Grand Total 200 852 1052 781 271


Court 01.01.2003 to 31.12.2003 Total to 31.12.2003 31.12.2003DERA MURAD JAMALI

Sessions Judge Dera Murad Jamali 44 215 259 209 50Additional Sessions Judge D.M. Jamali 55 109 164 138 26Judicial Magistrate Dera Murad Jamali 16 199 215 189 26Judicial Magistrate Gandawa 6 17 23 22 1Judicial Magistrate Chattar 2 5 7 7 0Majlis-e-Shoora Nasirabad 8 24 32 23 9Qazi Gandawa 7 20 27 18 9Qazi Dera Murad Jamali 28 95 123 83 40Grand Total 166 684 850 689 161


THIS PAGE BLANK


Delay Reduction and Performance Incentives


THIS PAGE BLANK


7 DELAY REDUCTION AND PERFORMANCE

INCENTIVES

7.1 Delay Reduction

The High Court of Balochistan, prior to the initiation of the Umbrella Project titled “Strengtheningof Institutional Capacity for Judicial & Legal Reform Project” financed and launched by the AsianDevelopment Bank under TA loan and even before the introduction of “Delay Reduction” strategyunder the Access to Justice Program; has taken lead in keeping the long (by time) and large (byvolume) pendency to its lowest possible state, inspite of the constraint of small number of JudicialOfficers with little facilities, when even the District and Sessions Judges were not having the facilityof official vehicle and have to travel in public transport. However the consistent pursuance by therespective Chief Justices of the High Court has resulted into low pendency rate in almost every Courtof Balochistan. Furthermore, the minutes of the meetings held under the Chairmanship of Hon’bleChief Justice with worthy Judges of the High Court, in the Administration Committee meetings orwith District Judges relating to improvement in Court performance, have always been circulatedfor the guidance and implementation by the subordinate Court Judges. Also, the directives receivedfrom the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Pakistan as well as of the Chief JusticesCommittee and of National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee have been circulated for strictcompliance; especially the initiative of Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan for early disposal of casespertaining to family matters, child custody, orphans, inheritance/succession, have yield fruitfulresults and such matters pending for quite some time with Civil Courts were disposed of on urgentbasis. Therefore, the guidelines issued from time to time, have been instrumental in the control oflarge pendency.

Likewise, pendency of cases in the High Court of Balochistan has been checked by formingBenches to decide matters of high profile relating to public concern as well as of cases of specialcategories like NAB, STA, ATA etc. and thus pendency in each category of cases is checked, whilestanding directives are available for fixation of oldest cases on priority and the daily cause listsalso reflect that the oldest case is fixed at the top and latest at the bottom, so that old mattersbe disposed of expeditiously. However, under strict supervision through the office of Sessions Judge(Inspection) and under the able guidance of Hon’ble Chief Justice, the pendency figures in thesubordinate courts is at its lowest i.e., each Judge on an average has slightly over 40 cases at hisfile, which is a tacit proof of the effective strategy of Delay Reduction in this province. A glimpse ofthe guidance issued to the subordinate judiciary for compliance is provided henceforth for a readyreference:—

ToAll the District & Sessions Judges,Balochistan.

Subject: GUIDELINES FOR SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY

The following Guidelines may kindly be circulated and brought to the notice of all the Sub-ordinates Judicial Officers for ensuring expeditious dispensation of justice which should beadhered to in letter and spirit:

(1) While issuing orders for process serving a 3 day notice should be given to the plaintifffor payment of process fee.

(2) The Court should also consider applying alternative modes of direct service throughsubstituted means viz: electronic devices of communication, fax, courier service and pub-lication in the newspapers.


(3) The Presiding Officer must ensure that all requisite documents are submitted along withthe plaint at the first hearing.

(4) The Presiding Officer shall ensure that written statements are filed within the stipulatedperiod of 30 days of receipt of service.

(5) Plaint and written statement should be properly scrutinized and in this respect theprovisions of the CPC, High Court Rules, Orders, Administrative Instructions, issuedfrom time to time, should be strictly followed.

(6) The Court should follow and observe the requirements of Orders X to XIV with a viewto narrowing down the contentious points and ascertain the real and concrete issues.

(7) The Presiding Officer shall ensure that application for the issue of interrogatories arefiled timely in the Court.

(8) After the settlement of issue and prior to trial matters like discovery of facts throughinterrogatory, discoveries of production of documents and issuance of commission, wherenecessary, be carried out promptly and penalty should be imposed for non compliance.

(9) The court after preliminary matters are settled should obtain within a period of 7 daysfrom the parties, a certificate of readiness and thereafter the case should be listed fortrial.

(10) The Court should ensure that all cases fixed for hearing on a prescribed day are heardand no case is postponed without hearing.

(11) Adjournment ordinarily should be refused on the request of the parties except for validreasons. In cases of Adjournments at the request of the counsel due to appearance in ahigher court it should be allowed on an application along with a copy of cause list.

(12) The court should ensure that parties and their counsels fully adhere the dates given byevidence and no adjournment be granted except in very rare cases and for sound reasons.

(13) All miscellaneous orders should be dictated by the presiding officer rather than the Courtreader.

(14) Depending upon the nature of miscellaneous applications, ordinarily such applicationsshould not lead to stopping proceeding in the main suit.

(15) Suits should not be dismissed nor restored without adequate reasons.(16) The Court should ensure that interim injunctions are granted for the shortest possible

period and the matter is disposed off expeditiously after hearing both the parties.(17) The court should ensure that miscellaneous applications are heard without affecting the

flow of trial proceedings.(18) All commercial cases should also be dealt as provided by Rules X of Chapter IK of the

High Court Rules and Orders Vol 1.(19) The presiding officer should ensure that evidence of the witnesses who are present in the

Court is recorded in one go and they are not frequently called. The court should also inappropriate cases, cause facts to be proved by affidavits, as prescribed in order 19 of theCPC.

(20) The court may utilize the following provision of Affidavits as prescribed in Order XIXRule.l of the CPC:

Any Court may at any time for sufficient reason order that any particular factor facts may be proved by affidavit, or that the affidavit of any witness may beread at the hearing, on such conditions as the Court thinks reasonable:Provided that where it appears to the Court that either party bona fide desiresthe production of a witness for cross-examination, and that such witness can beproduced, an order shall not be made authorizing the evidence of such witnessto be given by affidavit.

(21) The court should pronounce judgment within a period of 30 days after the conclusion ofarguments. For any default, the High Court should be informed of the reasons for delay,through the District & Sessions Judge concerned.


(22) The District and Sessions Judges in exercise of their appellate jurisdiction must carefullyscrutinize the judgments delivered by the subordinate courts. All arbitrary orders andjudgments should be reported forthwith to the High Court for appropriate disciplinaryaction against the concerned judicial officer.

(23) The District and Sessions Judges should regularly inspect and supervise the working andperformance of the subordinate courts and check the cases of inefficiency, corruption andundue delays.

(24) In criminal matters, the presiding officer shall ensure that Challan is submitted within therequisite period of 14 days. The court should take serious notice of negligence or unduedelay/default in the timely submission of the Challan. Appropriate disciplinary actionagainst the concerned official should also ’be recommended to the concerned Department.

(25) The District and Sessions Judge should ensure that cases are fixed according to date ofregistration of FIR and as per date of submission of Challan. There should be no pickand choose in this respect, however the law and directions of the superior courts shouldbe fully observed.

(26) In rent cases, the courts should follow the directions given by the Hon’ble Chief Justice ofPakistan in the case Barkat Ali V. Mohammad Ehsan (C A No. 1349 of 1996) as follows:

1. Affidavit of not more than two witnesses in support of the ejectment applicationshall be filed in the Court in addition to the affidavit of the petitioner himself insupport of the contents of the ejectment petition.

2. While replying to the ejectment application the respondent shall be similarly requiredto submit his own affidavit and affidavits of two other witnesses in support of hisaffidavit on the date fixed in the notice served upon him.

3. The parties shall be bound to produce their witnesses for purposes of their respectivecross-examination on the day fixed by the Court.

4. A party obtaining the affidavit of a witness in support of his petition/reply would bebound to produce him in the Court for cross-examination and in case of its failureto do so his evidence shall be excluded from consideration.

5. Appeals against the interim orders of the Rent Controller and resort to constitu-tional jurisdiction against orders at immediate stages arising out of the ejectmentproceedings should be discouraged.

6. The court should take serious view of the situation when witnesses to cross-examination in support of their affidavit deliberately avoid/evade appearance inCourt.

7. Adjournment of ejectment petition should not be allowed except under unavoidablecircumstances on an application moved by a party supported by affidavit. In suchcases also adjournment should not be made for a period exceeding three days.

Sd.REGISTRAR.

7.2 Judicial Statistics

The gathering of essential statistics in every sphere of human activity provides vital informationabout the past behaviour of events as well as enables us to foresee the shape of things in the nearfuture. Likewise, the collection of necessary statistics in relation to judicial performance of each courtin quantitative terms, provides us with details, like previous pendency of cases at the beginningof a month or year, number of cases instituted during the month and disposal during such periodalong with the number of cases remained for disposal in the following month/year. Adjudging theimportance of specific, accurate, fast and unambiguous collection of data and its computerizationfor future consumption, the Computer Branch; then consisting of a Computer Programmer and two


Computer Operators, with a couple of computers, were assigned the task of entering data as comingin from all the subordinate courts of Balochistan on various formats, as a routine on monthly basis.The keying-in of the judicial statistics started in the year 1999 and in the process of data entry,the filing-in format and proformas were got changed, so that the information could be gathered ina unique manner for all courts, to be entered precisely for each category and would be helpful forcomparison and preparation of comparative statements.

During these years many formats for supply of Data on Various aspect of judicial activity werereceived from the Federal and Provincial Governments as well as from the Hon’ble Supreme Court, assuch necessary improvements were made in the data collection proformas. However, with continuousindulgence, the data format streamlined and now the necessary statistics for the past five years isavailable for every Court, Tribunal etc. containing details of all category of cases and the data isfrequently utilized for creation of new posts as well as for transfer and posting of Judicial Officers.The tables included in the report in hand clearly provides the efforts put in for the collectionof these vital information and becomes handy when some specific information is required on anyaspect of judicial performance and even reflects the disposal trend of each Court or of individualJudicial Officer. The data so collected, is being entered and compiled for the High Court for eachand every category of Civil, Criminal, Labour, Customs, Ehtisab (NAB), Banking, Service andElection Tribunals and other related matters.

The compiled data for each Judge/Court is presented to the Hon’ble Chief Justice and InspectionJudges of the High Court for regular inspection, scrutiny and necessary directives are made toindividual Presiding Officers in appreciation of their work or for retribution in case of any failureon their part. With the induction of further staff in the Computer Branch of the High Court, it isanticipated that not only the data for the previous years, i.e., from the inception of each court willbe computerized but will be made available through internet for the benefit of everyone.

There is, however, a dire need for the development of an application software with necessaryinfrastructure (men and machinery) to enable the users to extract information in any pattern ormanner, whenever required, which will not only reduce search time but will curtail repeated efforts ofthe Court staff in streamlining the data and would ensure the authenticity of information about everycourt’s performance over certain period of time. A few patterns of the formats developed/utilizedfor collection of information is provided hereafter in this report, which still needs improvements andsimplification to evade discrepancies.

7.3 Judicial Performance Incentive

The idea of providing “Judicial Performance Incentives” to the Judicial Officers, has been embeddedin the plan of work under the Access to Justice Program, which is aimed at recognizing the effective,efficient and voluminous performance of individual Judicial Officers, who acquires highest numberof units as per laid down criteria, without sacrificing the quality of their work; to be benefitedmonetarily. However, since no budgetary allocation has been made even in the current years fiscalbudget of the High Court; as such no incentive grant is available to be utilized/paid, as a reward, forbetter performance, to the Judicial Officers of the subordinate courts of Balochistan. However, asbefore the Judicial Officers, whose performance based on his month-wise progress of work, is foundexcellent (both by volume and quality of work, as the number of disposal and quality of judgementsare checked by the worthy Inspection Judges) is being awarded with letter of appreciation and fornot being up to the work, an explanation or warning to improve the work is issued on regular basisand copies are placed in their respective performance record. However, the scheme for the grantof “financial incentive” will be placed before the Administrative Committee for final decision andbudget/funds would be sought/ reflected under the head “Honoraria” for the next years’ budget,


to meet the requirement and those Judicial officers, whose performance is found excellent would begranted incentive along with their staff from the allocated/available financial resources. This woulddefinitely inculcate a sense of competition and hard work among members of subordinate judiciaryresulting into improvement in overall performance of the judiciary while the ones who put in allout efforts with sincere zeal and enthusiasm, would get due reward by way of financial benefits andwould also be considered for accelerated promotion.

Apart from the above, an evaluation proforma has been developed in light of the instructionscontained in the High Court Rules and Orders and is being used by the Judges of the High Courtto record performance of individual subordinate Court Judge in relation to his file maintenance,recording and assessment of evidence and judgement writing skill etc. and is being filled in foreach judgement challenged in appeal before the High Court. The proforma on completion is signedby the respective High Court Judge and sent for placement in the personal file of the concernedJudge and will be utilized for writing ACRs or for consideration of promotion matters etc. Apartfrom the Judicial Officers, who have been issued appreciation letters; the following Judicial Officerswere issued notices/explanation/warning etc. for not securing the required number of units duringvarious months of the year 2003:—

District & Sessions Judges 07Additional District & Sessions Judges 07Judicial Magistrates 24Civil Judges 10Members Majlis-e-Shoora 13Qazi’s 24

The evaluation proforma as mentioned hereinabove is annexed for perusal.


PROFORM A FOR EVALUATION OF THE

SUBORDINATE COURT JUDGEM ENT BY HIGH COURT

(To be filled in quadruplicate)

1. Nature of Case with No. (High Court's case)

2. Title of Case: 3. Case heard by Division

Bench/Single Bench: 4. Case No. and title of Subordinate

Court with name of Judge/M agistrate/Qazi:

5. Order of the Court with date, impugned before High Court:

6. Judgement writing skill: i. Good: ii. Above average: iii Average: iv. Below Average: v. Poor

7. Remarks/Observations of the Bench: i. Appreciation of Evidence, (Appropriate/inappropriate)

ii. Contention raised by parties dealt with correctly or otherwise, while writing the Judgement.

iii. Case law referred in the case, if any applied/appreciated properly while writing Judgement

iv. W hether decision punishment was proper as per law.

8. Remarks, if any.

Dated: _________________ Signature of Judge(s).________________

7.4 Process Serving Establishment

In order to enhance the capacity of the process serving establishment, which at present consists ofa Civil Nazir posted at Quetta while 14 Naib Nazirs, 11 Bailiffs and 50 Process Servers have beenposted in the Courts of Senior Civil Judges and Civil Judges at Quetta, Sibi, Loralai, Nasirabad,Dera Allah Yar, Usta Muhammad and Hub; whereas keeping in view the requirement at other


courts, it has been proposed that 109 posts of various cadres will be created and acquired undera phased program during the next three years and the incumbents will be posted as per followingtable:—

Number of Posts S.No. Budgetary Head 6-21000 C-III Process Serving Establishment

Nazir Naib Nazir

Bailiff Process Server

Total

1 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at M astung, Kalat, Surab and Dasht.

1 0 4 8 13

2 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Khuzdar & Awaran and M ashkai

1 0 4 6 11

3 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Hub, Uthal

1 0 2 4 7

4 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Turbat, Panjgoor, Gawadar, Pasni, Tump, Dasht.

1 1 6 12 20

5 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Noshki and Dalbandin

1 0 2 4 7

6 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Kharan, M ashkail, Basima

1 0 3 6 10

7 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Sibi, Dhadar, Dera Bugti, Kohlu, Gandawa

1 0 5 10 16

8 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Loralai, Bori Sanjavi, Barkhan, M uslim Bagh

1 1 5 10 17

9 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at M usakhail.

1 0 1 2 4

10 Court of M ajlis-e-Shoora & Qazi at Zhob

1 0 1 2 4

Total 10 2 33 64 109

It may, however, be pointed out that out of the above said 109 posts, 10 posts of Nazirs and20 posts of Process Servers have been got sanctioned during the current financial year 2003-04 anddistributed to various courts, while the remaining posts will be acquired during next and subsequentfinancial years. It may also be mentioned here that the summons issued from the High Court andfrom the subordinate courts are invariably executed through Police establishment (in A-area) andthrough levies personnel (in B- area) and due to non-availability of proper mobility services withthe levies authorities in the far flung remote areas of Balochistan, the summons either could not beexecuted in due time or the report is sent after the due date which causes delay in the furtheranceof cases and difficulties for service upon the parties. However, directions have been issued to theconcerned authorities through respective District and Sessions Judges for proper implementation ofthe process while any delinquent delays by the concerned staff is dealt with through the concernedauthorities, while the Process Servers who do not comply or fulfill their responsibilities in a propermanner are being dealt with under E&D Rules. Besides for the enactment of law for penalizing


failure to carry out court orders on the service of process and production of witnesses, the matterhas already been taken up with the Provincial Law Department for drafting the law on the issueto be implemented in due course and will bring improvement in the working of Process ServingAgency and for taking action in case the service of summons is found to be unsatisfactory. It would,however, be of interest that a typical scenario, as reflected in the following table, be produced, toshow that what percentage of summons ordinarily served by the Process Serving establishment forthe civil Courts at Quetta, while in case of default of intentional avoidance on the part of concernedProcess Server, disciplinary action is initiated against him:

M onth/2004 Total Summons

Served Un-served Percentage

July 722 504 218 69%

August 915 664 261 72%

September 771 567 204 73%

October 855 617 238 72%

November 534 363 173 67%


Courts Professionalisation Plan


THIS PAGE BLANK


8 COURTS PROFESSIONALISATION PLAN

8.1 Courts Professionalisation Plan (2003-2005)

To strengthen the Institutional Capacity for Judicial and Legal Reforms in the Judicial Sector, theGovernment of Pakistan with the active collaboration of the Asian Development Bank has launchedthe “Access to Justice Program” (AJP) which, apart from other important aspects, strives for atime bound and costed action plan for professionalzing the Court’s management to be implementedduring the financial year 2003. The idea inter-alia includes measures to re-invent and streamlinethe Court Management along modern and professional lines and to implement capacity buildingmeasures for the Court’s officers to enable them to handle specialised tasks including Administration,Budgeting, Planning and Human Resource Development, to ensure the maximum and optimumutilisation of the available resources.

To achieve the prime object of professionalzing its Management, the High Court of Balochistanhas chalked out the following time bound and costed action plan to be implemented in a phasedmanner during the current and subsequent fiscal years, utilising the financing opportunities underthe Technical Assistance of Access to Justice Program and other similar resource windows. In orderto attain this end, the concept of capacity building through short and long term training (bothin country and abroad) of existing administrative and financial management staff and of JudicialOfficers will be explored with the active cooperation of the Federal Judicial Academy. The purposeis to train a core team of Judicial Officers in the modern concept of professional Court management,who could in turn, train other officers in due course. Besides, through a series of seminars, this will bearranged/organised to serve the vital purpose of identifying the required changes and modificationsfor redesigning the professional management of courts. It may not be out of place to mention herethat in line with the conditionalities of TA Loan under Access to Justice Program, one officer ofthe High Court of Balochistan with representatives of the other High Courts, was sent to USAfor a two weeks training programme, to study and observe the role of Court Administrators andFinancial Managers and Court management practices at California State courts, whereas the officeron return has actively been involved in evolving strategy for the better management of Courtprofessionalisation. Additionally, the services of experts in finance and planning for supervision offinances of the High Court and that of subordinate courts, will be acquired who would also beavailable for providing due guidance and technical training to the staff.

In response to the proposal to improve the professional administration of Courts in Pakistan,the following action plan has been suggested under the Access to Justice Reform Program for whichnecessary training is to be provided to Court administrators, Judges and non-judicial personnel ina range of major areas of Judicial reforms at the Federal Judicial Academy. These include:

• Management of the budgeting process;

• Management of relationships with the legislative and executive branches;

• Organisation and delivery of services to the trial Courts and Court management assistanceprograms to support improvements in the operation of the trial Courts;

• Building administrative system;

• Development of statistical system to measure the performance of the judicial system;

• Development of policy-making processes that rely on participation by all levels of the legalsystem;


• Development of managerial training programs for those persons assuming positions in theGovernment structure;

• Supervision of the Bar Association;

• Public outreach to educate the public about the legal system; and

• Strategic planning for the future.

An important component of the professionalisation programme is the holding of seminars to beconducted on various related themes. The seminars may be held to explore as to how changes canbe introduced in the legal system for efficient service delivery. These seminars may provide meetingpoints for Judiciary, Judicial Experts, Judicial Academia, Lawyers and other stakeholders in thejudicial sector. The tentative areas of these seminars may be as follows:

• Project Management.

• Planning.

• Management of the changes process.

• Team Building.

• How to consult stake holders.

• Judicial reforms and improved Court performances.

• Role of courts in democracy.

These seminars may be held under the provisions of the recently approved Technical AssistanceProject, which provides opportunities to implementing agencies for activities under several areas ofJudicial reforms.

Furthermore, the proposed action plan for such activities has been chalked out, starting withfinancial year 2003-04. This is reproduced below:

Tentative OrganisationalProposed activities time period Responsibility Costs1.Two weeks Intensive Study-Seminar—US

Oct/Nov. 2002 DPK/TAK US$3420, 190per person perday.

Computer training Aug. 2003 Federal JudicialAcademy

To be workedout by Fed-eral JudicialAcademy

2.a) National Administration ofJustice Workshop to improvepublic perception regardingworking of the courts (To beattended by the nominees ofthe High Court).

Jun. 2003 High Court ofBalochistan

To be workedout by theHigh Court


b) Provincial Administrationof Justice Workshop to im-prove public perception forprovincial judges.

Aug. 2003 High Court ofBalochistan


3.Public Outreach/Hearings (3meetings in different loca-tions)

Oct. 2003 High Court ofBalochistan, Quetta


4.To create core curriculum fortraining in Court professional-isation

Sep/Oct. 2003 Federal JudicialAcademy/BusinessSchool

To be workedout by FJA inconsultationwith HighCourt

5.Restructure of career path forregistrars/judicial administra-tors

Dec. 2003 High Court ofBalochistan


8.2 Citizen-Court Liaison Plan

The High Court of Balochistan vide Notification dated 14th September, 2002, has directed for theconstitution of District Citizen Court Liaison Committees in each of the Sessions Division/Districtas per following composition:—

1. District & Sessions Judge/Additional District &Sessions Judge

Chairman

2. President, District Bar Association Member3. Speaker, Zila Assembly/Naib Nazim Member4. EDO (Law)/District Attorney/ADA Member5. Zila Mohtasib Member6. President, District Chamber of Commerce and

IndustryMember

7. Representative of Women Community Member8-9. Representative of the Civil Society Member10. Community Liaison Facilitator Secretary (Ex-Officio)

* The tenure of office of non-official membersof the committee may be fixed at two years.

The functions of Citizen Court Liaison Committees have been described as follows:—

i. To setup and maintain an information Kiosk in every District Court premises for the guidanceof the public regarding all matters pertaining to different Courts.

ii. To promote legal literacy.

iii. To guide people regarding dispute prevention measures and alternate dispute resolution (ADR)avenues like Musalihat Anjumans, Small Causes Courts and others.


iv. To register, report and redress citizen’s grievances regarding the functioning of the judicialsystem in the District.

v. To provide a channel for the citizens and other stakeholders to send suggestions for reformand improvement.

It may, however, be clarified in the abovesaid notification that the provision of specific legaladvice to the litigants will not be the functional responsibility of the District Citizen Court LiaisonCommittees. In order to facilitate the working of the Citizen Court Liaison Committees, 10 postsof Community Liaison Officers and 10 posts each of Assistants and Naib Qasids have been createdduring the year 2003-04 and distributed among the respective District Courts for appointmentof staff. The report/minutes of the proceedings are conveyed to the High Court and many of theimportant issues taken up during meetings got resolved amicably with the intervention of concernedofficers or necessary directions are issued by the High Court for rectification of affairs. The meetingswith the representatives of District Government and with representatives of Civil Society etc., didprovide basis for the identification and early solution of the problems faced by the general public atlarge in relation to their litigations and for their appearance before various forums in the province.

8.3 Criminal Justice Coordination Committee

The High Court of Balochistan in consideration of the conditionality under the Access to JusticeProgram, has issued order No.303 dated 2nd August, 2003 meant for the establishment of CriminalJustice Coordination Committees with structure and functions enumerated in the order, which isreproduced below for the sake of clarity and convenience:—

To:-All the District & Sessions Judges in the province of Balochistan.

Subject: ESTABLISHMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATION COMMITTEE

I am directed to refer to the subject cited above and to state that the Provincial Police Officer, Balochistanhas intimated that under Article 109 of the Police Order, 2002, at the District level, a Criminal Justice Co-ordination Committee comprising District & Sessions Judge (Chairperson) and District Police Officer, DistrictPublic Prosecutor, District Superintendent Jail, District Probation Officer, District Parole Officer and DistrictHead of Investigation (Secretary) is required to be constituted, while in Balochistan, the District AdministrativeOfficers being counterparts of District Police Officer for ”B Area” also need to be included in the Committeeand where Heads of Investigation have not been appointed as yet, the Secretary of the Committee, for the timebeing, could be the District Police Officer.

The Chapter XI Article 109 to iii of the Police Order, 2002 deals with the establishment, composition andfunctions of the Criminal Justice Coordination Committee. The relevant chapter from Police Order, 2002 isappended below for convenience:—

CHAPTER XICRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATION COMMITTEE

109. Establishment.—There shall be a Criminal Justice Coordination Committee in a District. 110. Co position.-The Criminal Justice Coordination Committee shall consist of:

(a) District and Session Judge (Chairperson).

(b) Head of District Police.

(c) District Public Prosecutor.

(d) District Superintendent Jail.

(e) District Probation Officer.


(f) District Parole Officer.

(g) Head of investigation (Secretary).

111. Functions of the Criminal Justice Coordination Committee.—(1) The Criminal Justice CoordinationCommittee shall:—

(a) keep under review the operation of the criminal justice system and work towards the improvement of thesystem as a whole;

(b) promote understanding, cooperation and coordination in the administration of the criminal justice system;

(c) exchange information and give advance notice of local developments, which may affect other parts of thesystem;

(d) formulate coordinated priorities and plans to give effect to locally agreed policies;

(e) raise relevant issues with the appropriate authorities;

(f) promote the spread of good practices; and

(g) review the implementation of any decisions taken by the Criminal Justice Coordination Committee.

(2) The meeting of the Criminal Justice Coordination Committee shall be held at least once a month. TheSecretary of the Committee shall record the minutes of the meetings. ”

You are, therefore, requested to establish Criminal Justice Coordination Committee within your respectiveDistricts at the earliest and convene/hold its meeting on monthly basis as per provisions of Police Order, 2002and to submit regular compliance report to the quarters concerned under intimation to this office.

Sd.(REGISTRAR)

Copy forwarded for information and necessary action to:-

1. The Secretary, Govt. of Balochistan, Home & Tribal Affairs Department, Quetta.

2. The Provincial Police Officer, Balochistan, Quetta w.r.t his letter No. 11651-70/30/2002PR Cell dated7.6.2003.

Since its establishment, the District and Sessions Judges have been holding regular meetings ofthe Criminal Justice Coordination Committees in their respective districts which indeed has facili-tated the courts and the police/levies alike to accelerate the pace in conclusion of the investigationand for the submission of Challans within stipulated period, while the lethargic attitude on thepart of Prosecution Agencies is being checked and taken care of during the course of these meetingsand minutes of such meetings are invariably conveyed to the High Court for information and forguidance in relation to specific problems to be dealt with at higher level. It would, however, bebeneficial that the minutes of Criminal Justice Coordination Committee meeting held under thechairmanship of Sessions Judge, Pishin/Qila Abdullah on 15.07.2003, be reproduced henceforth,which abundantly provides, as to how the matters are dealt with in a comprehensive manner:—

(i) Registration of Cases. The actual and real culprits are to be booked under the relevant lawsin time in any incident, so that innocent persons should not suffer miseries of the process oflaw. The FIRs must not be based upon secret information to Police, as it is against law andhearsay cannot constitute legal basis for registration of FIR.

(ii) Registration of Cross Cases. Registration of cross cases should be avoided particularly afterfew days of the incident. The registration of cross cases is an attempt to damage the originalcase. So this aspect should properly be checked. The D PO and DAOs in their respectivejurisdiction are required to closely monitor this aspect.


(iii) When the incident occurs the Law Enforcement Agencies should take prompt action avoidingany delay. This on one hand will avoid further aggravation of the situation. Secondly it willalso ensure administration of Justice.

(iv) The cases should properly be investigated, incorporating all direct evidence, indirect evidence,circumstantial evidence, recovery evidence, medical examination, chemical examination. Evi-dence of finger print expert and trackers be got in time. Investigation Officers be acquaintedwith different categories of evidence during investigation. A complete Challan is required tobe submitted within 14 days in the competent Court of law. In exceptional cases permissionis obtained for submission of complete Challan where, some reports remains awaited. In thosecases too incomplete Challans should be submitted. SO the trial may not effect.

(v) In cases where the I.Os thinks that witnesses required in the cases will migrate to other areas,they may obtain personal sureties from them. So that the merit of trial shall not suffer.

(vi) It has been observed that process server in some cases forward misleading reports to the Courtsthat the witnesses or accused persons are not avail abele. This practice badly affects the crim-inal justice. SDPO and DAOs shall personally take interest and monitor their subordinates.

(vii) The list of absconder accused persons be prepared and submitted to DPO and DAOs, so thataction could be taken in both “A” and, “B” areas against these absconding accused persons;

(viii) The process upon the ’PW s shall be served timely, so that administration of justice may notbe delayed.

(ix) The medical certificates and FSL reports be collected in time by the I.Os. The DPO, SDPOsand DAOs should sheck the I.Os. The more these essential documents are delayed the biggerwill be the chances of delay in disposal of the cases. In some cases where the delay is causedthe documents are altered. So timely collection of these certificates will keep the check on allthese likely malpractices.

(x) The I.Os shall also ensure the obtaining of remand between 12:00 Noon to 1:00 P.M. So thatarrangements for transportation of the accused in case of judicial custody be done properlyand to avoid the inconvenience for the Courts as well.

(xi) When any incident occurs in A or B area, the concern agencies shall timely inform theircounter part in other adjoining areas, so that the culprits may not escape.

(xii) The DPOs and DAOs should develop close understanding with regard to crimes and criminalsin their areas. So as to lower the rate of crimes.

(xiii) The police and levies -shall’ check out their strategies and plans to minimize crimes in theDistricts and all the relevant issues be discussed and achievement of out come be communicatedto the authorities.

(xiv) There should be close liaison between the DPO and SDPOs in order to eliminate crimes.

(xv) Highway robbery is the most heinous crime, it cannot be tolerated in any civilized society.Police and levies should ensure day and night patrolling in order to safe guard the peace andtranquility on the roads. The DAO’s, S DPO’s and ADO’s pointed out that they have limitedfuel funds for patrolling the Highways. S9 the Home Secretary and I.G Police Balochistan mayconsider their genuine demand of Pishin, Killa Abdullah police and levies. This will improvea lot on safe guarding the Highways in these boarder districts.

(xvi) The probation Officer and parole Officers be appointed in these, two Districts. So they mayprepare history of prisoners/convicts in order to consider their release on probation. The HomeDepartment may look in to the case of appointment of probation and parole Officers.


(xvii) The Jail incharge shall ensure submission of fortnightly report to the District and SessionsJudge, so that the condition of prison and prisoners could be improved. They may also takeup the issue with the M.S Civil Hospital, Pishin and Chaman for sending Medical Officers forthe Jails daily. So that medical cover be provided to the prisoners well in time.

(xviii) D.A.O Killa AbduIuah Mr. Noor Muhammad Jogezai raised a point for shifting the officerof Judicial Magistrate killa Abdulllah to Killa Abdullah from Pishin as they face difficultiesand security risk during transportation of accused from Killa Abdullah to Pishin for physicalremand. The office of the Judicial Magistrate Killa Abdullah was shifted to Pishin by theHon’ble High Court due to Law and Order problems. Therefore, D.A.O Killa Abdullah isdirected to submit report as to whether the circumstances justify the shifting of the office ofJudicial Magistrate to Killa Abdullah or otherwise. On receiving this report, the Registrar ofHon’ble High Court will I be approached.

(xix) The DPO’s and DAO’s shall convene a meeting with, their subordinate officers in order toimplement all the decisions taken in this meeting.

Follow up actions of this meeting will be discussed in the next meeting of Criminal JusticeCommittee.


THIS PAGE BLANK


Separation of Civil and Criminal Courts:

Action Plan


THIS PAGE BLANK


9 SEPARATION OF THE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL COURTS:

ACTION PLAN (2002-2003 to 2003-2005)

Separation of criminal and civil courts is an essential component of improved working of the Sub-ordinate Judiciary. In case of Balochistan, there is already a complete separation of Criminal andCivil courts at the level of Civil Judges, Qazis and the Judicial Magistrates. Moreover, there isthe minimum incidence of judicial workload pendency in Balochistan. However, in view of the factthat many functions of the executive Magistracy are being transferred to the Subordinate Judi-ciary, there will be inevitably a requirement for enhancing the number of judicial officers at thesubordinate levels.

A criterion has been prepared for separating the civil and criminal courts, in cases of the extraburden of case load. The criterion has been used to judge the required number of additional judgesto take care of the existing pendency through the recruitment of additional judges. For the purposeof this action plan, a formula has been fixed at 400 cases per Civil Judge/Judicial Magistratewarranting the establishment of a new court. The formula has been used as a bench mark forworking out the required number of additional courts/judges to ensure the need based separationof civil and criminal courts.

The following steps have been taken for the preparation of this Action Plan:

• Total Case Load has been worked out for the civil as well as the criminal cases in the subor-dinate judiciary in whole of the province.

• The pendency figures have been used to work out the criterion for the separation of civil andcriminal courts on functional lines.

• The criterion/ formula has been used to work out the required number of Civil Judges /JudicialMagistrates to fully implement the Action Plan.

• The required number of judicial officers has been compared with the available strength of thejudicial officers to work out the additional requirements of judicial officers.

• All these data have been reduced in the form of a summary Action Plan, identifying thetentative time schedules for various ancillary activities needed to be undertaken for separatingthe civil and criminal courts based on caseload.

The shortfall identified by the above plan will be met through recruitment and training of newjudges under the additional budgetary allocations accruing from the Access to Justice Programme.The additional court rooms and infrastructure facilities planned to be provided under the Accessto Justice Programme will be utilised to make these new courts fully operative.

A detailed outline of the above Action Plan in respect of the Subordinate Judiciary in Balochistanis as follows:

A Table No. I Case Load Statistics

Sr.No.

Districts Total CivilCases (Civil)-Civil Judgesand Qazis

Total Crim-inal Cases(criminal)-J.M

Total Pen-dency (AtDistt. H.Q.)

Total Pen-dency (At SubDiv.)

1 Quetta 547 1156 2512 17032 Pishin 57 66 231 123


3 Loralai 36 88 227 1244 Zhob 51 43 129 945 Khuzdar 119 174 365 2936 Kalat 26 101 226 1277 Nushkai 94 36 164 1308 Turbat 60 255 419 3159 Hub 66 69 192 13510 Kharan 12 71 105 8311 Sibi 87 88 599 17512 Usta Muhammad 65 16 184 8113 Dera Allah Yar 113 21 272 13414 Dera Murad Jamali 14 17 163 3115 Musa Khail 7 4 32 11

B Table No. II Application of Case load Formula

Sr.No.

Districts TotalCivilCases(Civil)-CivilJudgesand Qazis

RequiredAddi-tionalC.Js @400 casesper court

TotalCrimi-nal Cases(criminal)-J.M

RequiredJ.Ms @400 casesper court

TotalPendency(At Distt.H.Q.)

1 Quetta 547 1 1156 3 25122 Pishin 57 - 66 - 2313 Loralai 36 - 88 - 2274 Zhob 51 - 43 - 1295 Khuzdar 119 - 174 - 3656 Kalat 26 - 101 - 2267 Nushkai 94 - 36 - 1648 Turbat 60 - 255 - 4199 Hub 66 - 69 - 19210 Kharan 12 - 71 - 10511 Sibi 87 - 88 - 59912 Usta Muhammad 65 - 16 - 18413 Dera Allah Yar 113 - 21 - 27214 Dera Murad Ja-

mali14 - 17 - 163

15 Musa Khail 7 - 4 - 32Total 1 3


C Table No. III Available and Required Strength Of Judicial Officers

Sr.No.

Districts AvailableCivilJudges/Qazis

Available Ju-dicial Magis-trates

Total Pen-dency (AtDistt. H.Q.)

RequiredAdditionC.J/J.Msto coverpendencyat Sub-DivisionalLevel

1 Quetta 5 7 2512 42 Pishin 1 5 2313 Loralai 5 5 2274 Zhob 1 2 1295 Khuzdar 3 3 3656 Kalat 4 4 2267 Nushkai 2 3 1648 Turbat 6 5 4199 Hub 2 3 19210 Kharan 3 3 10511 Sibi 7 8 59912 Usta Muhammad 1 1 18413 Dera Allah Yar 0 1 27214 Dera Murad Jamali 1 3 16315 Musa Khail 0 1 32

Total 4

For overcoming the present pendency at the level of the Subordinate Judiciary, a relativelysmaller number of additional Judicial Officers will be needed. The requirement of these officers, theancillary staff as well as the infrastructure can be easily met through the normal budget for thejudiciary as well as additional allocations under the Access to Justice Programme. The necessaryactions in this regard will be completed by financial year 2002-03.


THIS PAGE BLANK


Automation Plan


THIS PAGE BLANK


10 AUTOMATION PLAN

Surviving in a risk free environment had never been possible with manual data manipulation andfile management. The implementation of the automation plan will provide a breakthrough in thehistory of High Court of Balochistan, because efforts had never been made for computerisationof High Court of Balochistan since its establishment. Proper induction of computers started in1999 and during the last four years, 36 computers have been placed in about every branch, butcomputers are still being used mostly as word processor alone. Automation is not the replacementof typewriters with computers but it is a process of presenting the data available immediatelyin such a format that it could be helpful for the organisation in several ways, e.g., managementinformation system, library management system, decision support system, cause list generation,and case tracking system.

As an initiative of automation process and to maximise the utilisation of resources with minimumcost and data sharing in the High Court—Judicial, Administration, Budget, Copying and ComputerBranches along with the offices of Registrar, Session Judge (Inspection)—are networked and thisnetwork still needs to be extended throughout the building. Also, the Library Management andInformation System has already been developed and books present in the lawyers library havealready been entered. Unfortunately this system was not implemented for daily use.

Although Judicial Branch of the High Court has been facilitated to a greater extent by printingthe cause lists from computer but even then it is manual, not the automatic generation of causelist. However, generation of cause list could be made automatic by acquiring software from LahoreHigh Court with modifications as per our own requirements.

Justice with transparency to the litigant public with ease is the prime motto of the High Courtof Balochistan. The litigants/advocates could be facilitated in several ways e.g. by establishing acase enquiry point with the intention of providing current status of a case through case trackingsystem, publishing judgements and cause lists on the Internet and displaying the cause list of everycourt on large screen (plasma) during court hours. A “Management Information System” is alsorequired to be setup to facilitate the authorities in decision making by keeping a record of thejudicial staff regarding their monthly performance and current status of judicial and non-judicialofficers i.e. transfer, posting, seniority and strength. “Electronic Judgements” could be used as asource for provision of certified copies to the Advocates and general public by keeping the currentjudgements in safe and secure format and converting the judgements already announced in the pastthrough scanning process since the establishment of High Court, in an un-altered pattern. This willalso enable the Judges, Advocates and the general public to have easy, fast and low cost access tothe dictum of the Superior Court of the Province.

Incorporating the working of district judiciary with High Court is possible by bringing everysubordinate court within the network domain of High Court of Balochistan through provision ofhardware and software for maximising data sharing and minimising resource utilisation and wastageof time.

Proper implementation of automation plan is only possible after induction of new computerstaff, fulfilling the prerequisites and parallel implementation of each activity. The following tableprovides a glimpse of the present status of sanctioned strength of the posts of Computer Branch andits future requirements of technical staff to handle the additional more sophisticated assignments.


POST TITLE GRADE REQUIREDSTRENGTH

PRESENTSANC-TIONEDSTRENGTH

VACANTPOSTS

TO BEAP-POINTED

System Analyst (BPS-18) 1 1Programmer (BPS-17) 2 1 1Database Administrator (BPS-17) 1 1Network Administrator (BPS-17) 1 1Computer Operator (BPS-16) 0 3 1 1Hardware Engineer (BPS-16) 1 1Data Entry Operator (BPS-10) 10 10Machine Operator (BPS-7) 1 1


Management and Administration


THIS PAGE BLANK


11 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

11.1 The Registrar High Court of Balochistan

Dr. Abdur Rehman BrahuiRegistrar High Court of Balochistan

Dr. Abdur Rehman Brahui was born on 15th May, 1940 at Hudda Quetta. He passed the Ma-triculation Examination in the First Division, in 1957 from Government Sandeman High School,Quetta. After graduating from the Punjab University, he studied Law at S.M.Law College, Karachiand obtained Degree of Law from University of Karachi. He also has M.A English and M.A Urdudegrees. He attended a linguistics course at Oxford (U.K) and was admitted to degrees of Ph.D.in Urdu and Islamic Culture (Double Ph.D). He is the first local scholar from Balochistan havingPh.D. and a double Ph.D. is rare in any case.


11.2 Officers of the Balochistan High Court

Designation Name of Officer Present PostingREGISTRAR Dr. Abdul Rehman BrahuiSESSIONS JUDGE INSPECTION Mr. Atiq-ur-RehmanSECRETARY TO CHIEF JUSTICE SYED ANWAR AFTAB

(District & Session Judge)ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR Mr. AurangzaibDEPUTY REGISTRAR Mr. Arshed MehmoodASSISTANT REGISTRAR Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Resident BranchASSISTANT REGISTRAR Mr. Noor Muhammad Accounts BranchASSISTANT REGISTRAR Mr. Faiz Rasool Budget BranchASSISTANT REGISTRAR Mr. Noor Ahmed Construction BranchCOMPUTER SECTION Muhammad Tanveer System AnalystCOMPUTER SECTION Syed Hassan Sheraz Rizvi Computer OperatorCOMPUTER SECTION Shafiullah Shahwani Computer OperatorREADER Mr. Khurshid Ali Mr. Justice Amanullah Khan YasinzaiREADER Syed Athar Aftab Mr. Justice Akhter Zaman MalghaniREADER Mr. Muhammad Akber Mr. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed (CJ)READER Mr. Muhammad Fiaz Mr. Justice Ahmed Khan LashariREADER Mr. Muhammad Shafiq Copying BranchREADER Mr. Imdad Hussain Judicial BranchREADER Mr. Ghulam Haider Chief JusticeREADER Mr. Abdul Rashid Mr. Justice Muhammad Nadir KhanPRIVATE SECRETARY Mr. Shah Bakhsh Mr. Justice Fazal-ur-RehamnPRIVATE SECRETARY Mr. Qaisar Khan Mr. Justice Akhter ZamanPRIVATE SECRETARY Mr. Muhammad Shabir Mr. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmad (CJ)PRIVATE SECRETARY Mr. Abdul Hameed Mr. Justice Ahmed Khan LashariPRIVATE SECRETARY Mr. Amanullah Mr. Justice Muhammad Nadir KhanSUPERINTENDENT Mr. Abdul Nabi Judicial BranchSUPERINTENDENT Mr. Muhammad Ishfaq Mr. Justice Fazal-ur-RehmanSUPERINTENDENT Mr. Agha Muhammad LibrarySUPERINTENDENT Mr. Rahim Bakhsh Judicial BranchSUPERINTENDENT Mr. Qamar-uz-Zaman Record BranchSUPERINTENDENT Mr. Amanullah Judicial BranchSUPERINTENDENT Mr. Ali Jan Admin BranchLIBRARIAN Mr. Abdul MalikSENIOR TRANSLATOR Mr. Muhammad Arif Judicial Branch


11.3 Sanctioned Strength of the High Court

S.No. Particulars BPS Quetta Sibi Mekran Reserve Total1 Chief Justice 1 0 0 0 12 Judge 7 2 2 0 113 Registrar 21 1 0 0 0 14 Dist. & Sess. Judge, Inspection 20 1 0 0 0 15 Secretary to Chief Justice 18 1 0 0 0 16 Additional Registrar 19 1 0 0 0 17 Director (Judicial Academy) 19 1 0 0 0 18 Deputy Registrar 18 2 0 0 0 29 Librarian 18 1 0 0 0 110 System Analyst 18 1 0 0 0 111 Assistant Registrar 17 5 1 1 0 712 Private Secretary 17 9 2 2 0 1313 Superintendent 17 7 1 1 0 914 Reader 17 10 2 2 0 1415 Senior Translator 17 2 0 0 0 216 Secretary to DSJ, Inspection 17 1 0 0 0 117 Assistant Security Officer. 16 1 0 0 0 118 Computer Operator 16 3 0 0 0 319 Personal Assistant 15 19 1 2 0 2220 Assistant 11 19 2 2 0 2321 Garage Superintendent (B-11) 11 1 0 0 0 122 Caretaker 8 2 0 0 0 223 Junior Translator 7 2 0 0 0 224 Senior Clerk 7 17 1 2 0 20

(including one S.Clerk cum Librarian)25 Telephone Operator 7 2 0 0 0 226 Copyist (B-7) 7 2 0 0 0 227 Copyist (B-5) 5 2 0 0 0 228 Junior Clerk 5 22 2 2 0 2629 Drivers 4 23 1 0 0 24

(including 6 for Retd. Judges)30 Court Jamadar 3 1 0 0 0 131 Head Bailiff 3 1 1 0 0 232 Daftri 2 8 1 2 1 1233 Book Binder 4 3 0 0 0 334 Process Server 1 3 0 4 0 735 Naib Qasid 1 45 6 4 0 5536 Bailiff 1 9 3 3 0 1537 Tubewell Operator 4 1 0 0 0 138 Frash 1 23 0 0 0 2339 Sweeper 1 13 4 1 0 1840 Plumber 5 1 0 0 0 141 Mali 1 18 3 0 0 2142 Electrician 5 1 0 0 0 143 Chowkidar 1 8 3 1 0 1244 Part Time Sweeper 4 0 0 0 4

Grand Total 301 36 31 1 369


11.4

Sanct

ioned

Str

ength

ofth

eSess

ions

Court

s:U

nder

Head

C-I

S.

No

Part

icula

rsG

rade

TP

To

tal

TP

Tot

al

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

To

tal

TP

Tot

al

1D

istr

ict

&

Sessio

ns J

udge

20

22

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

00

17

17

2A

dditio

nal D

SJ

19

15

60

11

11

01

23

11

11

00

01

11

12

11

33

00

317

20

3C

om

munity

Lia

ison O

ffic

er

17

11

01

11

10

11

01

10

11

01

11

11

11

10

010

010

4S

updt:

16

22

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

00

17

17

5A

ssis

tant

11

11

21

11

12

11

21

11

12

11

11

21

11

12

11

11

21

12

11

21

12

11

010

16

26

6J/S

Ste

no

12

27

91

12

22

21

11

34

22

22

11

11

11

22

12

32

24

41

10

434

38

7R

eader

11

17

81

12

22

21

11

34

22

22

11

11

11

22

12

32

24

41

10

334

37

8S

/Cle

rk7

26

81

12

22

21

12

13

22

22

11

11

11

11

12

31

13

31

10

528

33

9R

/keeper

65

50

11

11

11

22

33

22

01

10

01

10

22

11

00

20

20

10

Offic

e C

lerk

00

00

01

10

00

00

11

00

00

00

22

11

Englis

h C

lerk

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

12

Ahlm

ed

52

20

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

22

13

J/C

lerk

51

10

11

11

33

33

11

14

54

42

22

21

12

23

31

45

22

44

00

346

49

14

Copie

st

60

00

00

11

11

00

00

00

00

00

02

215

Driver

41

78

11

22

22

11

13

42

22

21

11

11

12

22

22

24

41

10

234

36

16

Daft

ri2

22

40

11

00

11

00

00

00

11

00

00

25

717

N/Q

asid

12

11

13

12

31

45

13

42

23

811

33

13

43

31

34

22

15

63

69

16

72

810

22

017

71

88

18

Mali

11

10

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

22

11

11

11

11

22

00

016

16

19

Chow

kid

ar

11

23

11

11

22

21

11

23

44

11

22

22

11

11

23

14

11

23

31

10

925

34

20

R/L

ifte

r1

11

00

00

00

00

00

11

00

00

00

22

21

Sw

eeper

12

21

11

11

11

11

23

22

11

21

11

11

12

33

22

41

12

22

41

10

823

31

22

Pro

cess S

erv

er

11

12

11

01

10

11

00

01

11

10

11

00

00

26

823

Baili

f1

11

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

01

1T

ota

l16

75

91

212

14

424

28

324

27

014

14

15

37

52

030

30

422

26

016

16

318

21

115

16

426

30

15

29

44

522

27

642

48

012

12

00

078

418

496

Quetta

Anti

Corr

uption

Pis

hin

Lora

lai

Zhob

Sib

iD

era

A

llah Y

ar

Dera

Mura

dJam

ali

Usta

Moham

mad

Nushki

Khara

nK

ala

tK

huzdar

Hub

Mekra

nM

usaK

hail

Tota

lR

eserv

e

11.5

Sanct

ioned

Str

ength

ofth

eSubord

inate

Court

s:U

nder

Head

C-I

I

S.N

o.P

artic

ular

sG

rade

TP

Tot

alT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

ota

lT

PT

otal

TP

Tot

alT

PT

otal

1S

r. c

ivil

Judg

e18

22

11

00

11

11

00

00

00

00

00

55

2C

ivil

Judg

e17

15

61

11

10

22

01

10

11

00

01

10

00

112

133

M.M

. Sho

ora

180

02

21

11

10

01

11

11

12

22

21

11

13

30

016

164

Qaz

i17

00

44

11

44

00

11

21

11

23

13

43

31

11

16

60

327

305

J/M

agis

trat

e17

16

75

55

52

21

78

11

11

33

12

33

34

41

23

12

31

15

510

1015

4964

6C

ourt

of C

lerk

81

10

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

01

17

Ass

ista

nt11

11

11

11

01

10

00

00

11

11

00

11

06

17

8R

eade

r11

00

22

11

11

00

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

22

00

1313

9N

azir

100

01

11

11

10

00

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

010

010

10S

enio

rC

lerk

/Rea

ders

7/6

213

157

71

67

11

19

102

22

23

32

35

33

44

12

31

34

05

510

1018

6381

11Ju

nior

Cle

rk5

217

197

712

124

41

1415

22

22

15

61

56

17

81

910

16

71

56

33

1313

1010

1911

113

012

J/S

Ste

no12

313

161

67

66

22

110

112

22

23

31

34

33

44

12

31

34

11

55

1010

1865

8313

Nai

b Q

asid

14

1721

77

1414

55

216

182

22

21

67

26

81

78

19

102

79

26

83

314

1415

1530

121

151

14M

ali

00

00

11

00

00

00

00

00

00

11

15P

roce

ss S

erve

r1

26

81

45

34

71

23

45

91

12

22

35

21

32

22

24

51

62

13

11

25

16

55

3536

7116

Bai

lif1

00

11

01

11

10

00

00

11

11

01

10

06

617

Cop

iest

60

00

01

10

00

00

00

00

11

00

22

18S

wee

per

13

47

14

51

67

22

26

81

11

13

31

12

11

22

21

31

12

02

210

1021

3556

19C

how

kida

r1

22

42

21

45

22

19

100

01

12

12

32

21

45

13

41

23

11

66

1010

1940

59T

otal

2186

107

444

488

6775

223

2515

88##

013

130

1313

630

3612

2739

432

367

4552

1631

4711

2839

213

157

6471

800

8011

560

479

9

ST

AT

EM

EN

T S

HO

WIN

G T

HE

SA

NC

TIO

NE

D S

TR

EN

TH

UN

DE

R T

HE

HE

AD

CII

SU

BO

RD

INA

TE

CO

UR

T

Que

ttaP

ishi

nLo

rala

iZ

hob

Sib

iD

era

Alla

h Y

arU

sta

Moh

amm

ad

Der

aM

urad

Jam

ali

Nus

hki

24/0

4/20

04

Mek

ran

Tot

alK

hara

nK

alat

Khu

zdar

Hub

Mus

akha

il

Res

erve


S. No.Name of Courts

1994-951995-96

1996-971997-98

1998-991999-00

2000-0120001-02

2002-032003-04

1District & Sessions Judges

66

88

818

1818

1818

2Additional District & Sessions Judges

1212

1616

1617

2021

2323

3Senior Civil Judges

11

22

25

55

55

4Civil Judges

1111

1111

1112

1212

1213

5Judicial M

agistrates7

713

2323

4449

5459

64

6M

ember M

ajlis-e-Shoora9

911

1111

1418

1616

16

7Q

azis25

2424

2425

2527

3030

30

Total76

7385

9596

135149

156163

169

COMPARATIVE STATEM

ENT OF SANCTIONED STRENGTH OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS FROM 1994-95 TO 2003-04

SANCTIONED STRENGTH OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS FROM 1994-95 TO 2003-04

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

1994-951995-96

1996-971997-98

1998-991999-00

2000-0120001-02

2002-032003-04

District & Sessions Judges

Additional District &Sessions Judges

Senior Civil Judges

Civil Judges

Judicial Magistrates

Mem

ber Majlis-e-Shoora

Qazis

SANCTIONED STRENGTH OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS FROM 1994-95 TO 2003-04

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

District &SessionsJudges

AdditionalDistrict &SessionsJudges

Senior CivilJudges

Civil Judges

JudicialMagistrates

MemberMajlis-e-Shoora

Qazis

1994-951995-961996-971997-981998-991999-002000-0120001-022002-032003-04


11.6 Judicial Officers Retired From 1994–2003

11.6.1 District and Sessions Judges

S.No NAME OF OFFICER DATE OF REMARKSRETIREMENT

1 Agha Abdul Wajid 27.5.1997 Qualifying service2 Dr. Abdul Rehman Brahui 14.5.2000 Superannuation3 Mr. Muhammad Suleman Baloch Resigned4 Mr. Muhammad Anwar Lehri 3.6.2002 Superannuation5 Mr. Jamil Khan Sherwani Qualifying service6 Mr. Muhammad Yousaf Khoso 1.11.2002 Superannuation7 Mr. Muhammad Qasim Bashir 26.11.1997 Parent Department S&GAD8 Mr. Muhammad Wasay Tareen 12.8. 1997 Dismissed9 Malik Sarwar Awan 1.7.1996 Repatriated to Parent Police Department.

11.6.2 Additional District & Sessions Judges


1 Mr. Muhammad Haneef Sumalani 16.9.1996 Retired2 Mr. Amanullah Marri 26.8.1996 Terminated3 Khawaja Muhammad 10.11.1996 Superannuation4 Mr. Mittal Khan 19.4.2003 Adhoc appointment not extended5 Mr. Muhammad Ali 24.12.2002 Qualifying service

11.6.3 Civil Judges


1 Mr. Ishtiaq Ahmed 2002 Dismissed2 Mr. Abdul Nasir Khan 27.10.2002 Resigned3 Mr. Sohail Ahmed Ansari 27.10.2002 Resigned

11.6.4 Judicial Magistrates


1 Mr. Abdul Latif 13.11.1999 Appointed as Asstt: Commissioner2 Mr. Ghulam Azam 2.8.2000 Resigned3 Mr. Naseer Ahmed 7.8.2000 Resigned4 Mr. Muhammad Farooq 21.4.2000 Resigned5 Mr. Jaffar Raza Khan 18.9.2000 Service dispensed with6 Mr. Muhammad Imran Khan 1.4.2000 Resigned7 Mr. Attaullah Marri 20.12.1999 Dismissed8 Mrs. Noor Jan Mengal 19.4.2003 Adhoc appointment not extended


11.6.5 Members of Majlis-e-Shoora


1 Moulvi Ahmed Shah 1999 Qualifying service2 Moulvi Haidayatullah 2.3.2000 Superannuation3 Moulvi Abdul Khaliq 2.2.2001 Superannuation4 Moulvi Khuda-e-Rahim Shah 1997 Qualifying service5 Moulvi Noor Ahmed 1997 Superannuation6 Moulvi Abdul Qayyum 31.7.2002 Qualifying service7 Moulvi Muhammad Yaqoob 10.8.2000 Superannuation8 Moulvi Abdul Wahab 9.10.2003 Superannuation9 Moulvi Imam-ud-Din 5.1.2003 Superannuation

11.6.6 Qazis


1 Moulvi Muhammad Musa 1997 Dismissed from service2 Qazi Ahmed Jan 24.6.1997 Dismissed3 Moulvi Taj Muhammad Superannuation4 Moulvi Fateh Muhammad 10.3.1996 Died5 Mr. Hassan Shah Parent Department6 Moulvi Abdul Saboor 2000 Adhoc appointment not extended


11.7 Process Serving Establishment

Particulars Grade Loralai Sibi Quetta Khuzdar TotalT P Total T P Total T P Total T P Total T P Total

Naib Nazir Civil Judge 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 4 4Prosess Server 2 0 0 9 9 1 1 10 10Piada’s 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 3 3Civil Nazir 8 0 0 1 1 0 1 1Bailif 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1Grand Total 0 2 2 0 3 3 0 13 13 0 1 1 0 19 19

11.8 Organisational Chart of the High Court

CHIEF JUSTICE

Secretary to Chief Justice Registrar

Director Judicial Academy

Deputy Registrar (Admin)

Sessions Judge (Inspection)

Assistant Registrar Budget

Assistant Registrar Resident

Superintendent SB

Judges of High Court (8)

Secretary to S.J (Inspection)

Superintendent Copying Branch

Superintendent Roster Branch

Assistant Registrar Accounts

Superintendent DB

Additional Registrar Computer Programmer

Superintendent(Inspection)

Superintendent (Admin)

Assistant RegistrarConstruction

Deputy Registrar (Judicial)


11.9 Organisational Chart of the Provincial Judiciary

Chief Justice

District & Sessions Judge

Additional District & Sessions Judge Member Majlis-e-Shoora

Senior Civil Judge

Civil Judge

Judicial Magistrate Qazi

11.10 Organisational Chart of a Typical Sessions Division

District & Sessions Judge

Additional District & Sessions Judge Member Majlis-e-Shoora

Senior Civil Judge

Civil Judge

Judicial Magistrate

Qazi

Ministerial Staff Process Serving Agency


11.11 Budgetary Statistics

Object Particulars Allocation 2002-2003

High Court Quetta

High Court Bench Sibi

Total

01100 Total Pay of Officers 8,025,605 7616375 409230 8,025,605 01200 Total Pay of Staff 8,062,565 7614721 447844 8,062,565 02000 Total Regular Allowance 8,767,514 8172047 595467 8,767,514 03000 Total Other Allowance (EX. TA) 299,305 298,955 350 299,305

Honria 8,955 8,955 8,955 03400 Medical Charges 290,350 290000 350 290,35010000 Purchase of D-Goods 2,069,000 2,007,000 62,000 2,069,000 11000 Purchase of Transport 2,007,000 2007000 2,007,000

Purchase of Cycle - -

12000 Purchase of M& E 50,000 50000 50,000

13000 Purchase of F & F 12,000 12000 12,000 40000 R/M of D/Goods 475,473 449,973 25,500 475,473 41000 R/M of Transport 359,238 356138 3100 359,238

42000 R/M of M & E 113,835 93835 20000 113,835

43000 R/M of F&F 2,400 2400 2,400 50000 Commodities 7,617,001 7,183,001 434,000 7,617,001 51000 Transportation 1,810,987 1,718,987 92,000 1,810,987 51100 T.A to Government Servant 463,831 399831 64000 463,831

51300 P.O.L Charges 1,343,076 1315076 28000 1,343,076

51400 Transportation of Goods - -

51200 Conveyance 4,080 4080 4,080 52000 Communication 1,539,107 1,439,107 100,000 1,539,107 52100 P & T 270,000 250000 20000 270,000

52200 T & T 1,269,107 1189107 80000 1,269,10753000 Utilities 2,595,048 2,453,048 142,000 2,595,048 53100 Gas 929,487 929487 929,487

53200 Water 35,000 3000 32000 35,000

53300 Electricity 1,513,405 1413405 100000 1,513,405

53400 Hot & Cold W/C 117,156 107156 10000 117,15654000 Stationary 520,000 500000 20000 520,000 55000 Printing 494,850 479850 15000 494,850 56000 Books 278,528 255528 23000 278,528 57000 Uniform 88,710 86710 2000 88,710 59000 Other 289,771 249771 40000 289,771 60000 Transfer Payment 2,295,430 2,295,430 - 2,295,430 64200 Grant in Aid to Bar 2,200,000 2200000 2,200,00067000 Entertainment 95,430 95430 95,430 64201 Grant in Aid for ATC 4,178,646 4178646 4,178,646

Total 41,790,539 39,816,148 1,974,391 41,790,539

Distribution of Final Budget for the year 2002-2003 under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts A High Court


D.F. Object Particulars Allocation 2002-2003

6.210 01100 Total Pay of Officers 7616375

01200 Total Pay of Staff 7614721

02000 Total Regular Allowance 8172047

03000 Total Other Allowance (EX. TA) 298,955

Honraria 8955

03400 Medical Charges 290000

10000 Purchase of D-Goods 2,007,000

11000 Purchase of Transport 2007000

Purchase of Cycle 0

12000 Purchase of M& E 0

13000 Purchase of F & F 0

40000 R/M of D/Goods 449,973

41000 R/M of Transport 356138

42000 R/M of M & E 93835

43000 R/M of F&F 0

50000 Commodities 7,183,001

51000 Transportation 1,718,987

51100 T.A to Government Servant 399831

51300 P.O.L Charges 1315076

51400 Transportation of Goods 0

512000 Conveyance 4080

52000 Communication 1,439,107

52100 P & T 250000

52200 T & T 1189107

53000 Utilities 2,453,048

53100 Gas 929487

53200 Water 3000

53300 Electricity 1413405

53400 Hot & Cold W/C 107156

54000 Stationary 500000

55000 Printing 479850

56000 Books 255528

57000 Uniform 86710

59000 Other 249771

60000 Transfer Payment 6,474,076

64200 Grant in Aid to Bar 2200000

Grant in Aid for ATC 417864667000 Entertainment 95430

Total 39,816,148

Distribution of Final Budget grant for the year 2002-2003 under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts A High Court, Quetta


D.F. Object Particulars Allocation 2001-20026.210 01100 Total Pay of Officers 409230

01200 Total Pay of Staff 44784402000 Total Regular Allowance 59546703000 Total Other Allowance (EX. TA) 350

Honraria -

03400 Medical Charges 350

10000 Purchase of D-Goods 62,000

11000 Purchase of Transport 0

Purchase of Cycle 0

12000 Purchase of M& E 50000

13000 Purchase of F & F 12000

40000 R/M of D/Goods 25,500

41000 R/M of Transport 3100

42000 R/M of M & E 20000

43000 R/M of F&F 2400

50000 Commodities 434,000 51000 Transportation 92,000

51100 T.A 64000

51300 P.O.L Charges 28000

51400 Transportation of Goods 0

512000 Conveyance 0

52000 Communication 100,000

52100 P & T 20000

52200 T & T 80000

53000 Utilities 142,000

53100 Gas 0

53200 Water 32000

53300 Electricity 100000

53400 Hot & Cold W/C 10000

54000 Stationary 2000055000 Printing 1500056000 Books 2300057000 Uniform 200059000 Other 4000060000 Transfer Payment -

64200 Grant to Bar Council 067000 Entertainment 0

0

Total 1,974,391

Distribution of Budget Grant for the year 2002-2003 under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts A High Court, Sibi Bench


ParticularsAllocation 2002-2003

Quetta

Special CourtQ

uetta

PishinNushki

KharanLoralai

ZhobSibi

Dera Allah Yar

DeraM

uradJam

ali

UstaM

ohamm

ad

Mustung

KhuzdarHub

Mekran

Musa

KhailReserved

Total

Total Pay of Officers6,118,041

1,518,534

122,775

375,395

216,500

126,000

277,230

319,300

511,300

387,629

499,000

17,780

458,646

337,270

335,400

441,500

173,782

6,118,041

Total Pay of Staff13,116,785

2,930,185

370,910

767,394

517,303

462,000

653,023

416,100

1,077,760

982,700

670,700

549,918

878,978

1,026,720

576,800

1,004,700

231,594

13,116,785

Total Regular Allowance10,905,850

2,253,816

251,200

669,305

450,542

365,000

567,998

447,472

882,274

793,702

613,300

366,520

703,123

834,700

584,100

824,200

298,598

10,905,850

Total Other Allowance EX. TA

237,369

32,683

-

-

-

-

111,175

-

25,000

-

2,561

-

27,200

-

-

-

38,750

-

237,369

Medical

237,369

32,683

111,175

25,000

2,561

27,200

38,750

237,369

Leave Salaries-

-

Purchase of D-Goods2,430,450

512,000

29,000

160,000

68,400

50,000

437,900

50,000

200,000

153,150

172,000

100,000

190,000

70,000

75,000

113,000

50,000

-

2,430,450

Purchase of Cycle45,550

12,000

4,000

6,400

3,150

12,000

8,000

45,550

Purchase of M& E

609,900

70,000

70,000

12,000

87,900

100,000

50,000

60,000

50,000

60,000

20,000

30,000

609,900

Purchase of F & F1,775,000

430,000

25,000

90,000

50,000

50,000

350,000

50,000

100,000

100,000

100,000

50,000

130,000

50,000

75,000

75,000

50,000

1,775,000

R/M of D/Goods

1,154,126

318,000

39,000

104,080

40,000

20,000

25,133

40,000

130,000

44,000

103,328

35,585

50,000

73,000

15,000

92,000

25,000

-

1,154,126

R/M of Transport

801,461

223,000

21,000

80,000

15,000

20,000

18,133

40,000

90,000

40,000

68,328

20,000

40,000

36,000

15,000

50,000

25,000

801,461

R/M of M

& E164,665

45,000

8,000

14,080

10,000

3,000

30,000

2,000

5,000

15,585

20,000

12,000

164,665

R/M of F&F

188,000

50,000

10,000

10,000

15,000

4,000

10,000

2,000

30,000

10,000

17,000

30,000

188,000

R/M of Building

-

-

Comm

odities9,990,694

2,465,656

90,310

618,129

389,104

322,000

315,450

442,513

1,053,000

577,000

630,263

271,500

653,828

708,845

427,500

793,300

232,896

-

9,991,294

Transportation3,793,092

677,656

13,310

249,159

153,334

120,000

111,550

175,000

495,000

291,000

267,348

42,000

350,389

239,000

166,500

335,000

106,846

-

3,793,092

T.A1,244,880

156,972

13,310

78,611

45,000

60,000

5,950

65,000

160,000

100,000

82,348

20,000

188,389

75,000

150,000

44,300

1,244,880

P.O.L

2,547,212

519,684

170,548

108,334

60,000

105,600

110,000

335,000

191,000

185,000

22,000

162,000

164,000

166,500

185,000

62,546

2,547,212

Conveyance1,000

1,000

1,000

Comm

unication1,680,298

310,000

25,000

95,000

75,000

80,000

70,000

105,553

135,000

80,000

123,400

72,500

78,000

124,845

122,000

136,000

48,000

-

1,680,298

P & T116,245

10,000

5,000

10,000

5,000

3,000

20,000

10,000

8,900

2,500

5,000

3,845

12,000

16,000

5,000

116,245

T & T1,564,053

300,000

20,000

85,000

70,000

80,000

70,000

102,553

115,000

70,000

114,500

70,000

73,000

121,000

110,000

120,000

43,000

1,564,053

Utilities2,105,460

808,000

10,000

115,000

59,030

65,000

59,230

65,000

165,000

92,000

108,000

85,000

82,800

200,000

10,000

165,000

17,000

-

2,106,060

Gas

395,000

300,000

30,000

10,000

5,000

15,000

10,000

25,000

395,000

Water

35,000

10,000

2,000

3,000

5,000

10,000

5,000

35,000

Electricity1,217,230

400,000

55,000

40,000

50,000

37,230

45,000

120,000

70,000

80,000

30,000

30,000

140,000

120,000

1,217,230

Hot & Cold W/C

458,230

98,000

10,000

30,000

19,030

15,000

22,000

20,000

35,000

15,000

10,000

40,000

27,800

50,000

10,000

40,000

17,000

458,830

Stationary864,740

200,000

25,000

50,000

29,740

25,000

40,000

30,000

85,000

50,000

50,000

30,000

50,000

60,000

50,000

60,000

30,000

864,740

Printing468,300

250,000

30,000

15,000

15,000

65,000

5,000

20,000

10,000

20,000

20,000

18,300

468,300

Books411,224

90,000

20,000

25,000

10,000

8,070

15,000

42,000

20,000

22,515

10,000

33,639

40,000

20,000

40,000

15,000

411,224

Uniform72,580

30,000

2,000

3,970

2,000

2,000

1,600

1,960

6,000

4,000

4,000

2,000

4,000

4,000

4,000

1,050

72,580

Other595,000

100,000

15,000

55,000

30,000

20,000

25,000

35,000

60,000

35,000

35,000

20,000

35,000

45,000

35,000

35,000

15,000

595,000

Others Payment of Cast of Land

-

Total43,953,315

10,030,874

903,195

2,694,303

1,681,849

1,345,000

2,387,909

1,715,385

3,879,334

2,938,181

2,691,152

1,341,303

2,961,775

3,050,535

2,013,800

3,268,700

1,050,620

-

43,953,915

Distribution of Final Budget for the Courts of Sessions Judges/Additional Sessions Judges for the Year 2002-2003 under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts C-I Sessions Courts


D.F.O

bjectParticulars

Allocation2002-2003

Quetta

PishinNushki

KharanLoralai

Musa

KhailZhob

SibiDera Allah Yar

DeraM

uradJam

ali

UstaM

ohamm

ad

Mustung

KhuzdarHub

Mekran

ReserveTotal

6.2101100

Total Pay of Officers10,921,928

1,300,837

553,702

630,369

632,700

1,072,365

279,915

367,148

1,234,644

250,875

563,201

172,800

1,043,052

814,200

498,120

1,508,000

10,921,928

1200Total Pay of Staff

16,527,905

2,507,688

1,232,920

930,570

872,000

1,845,300

287,000

545,760

2,461,699

432,885

815,600

418,210

1,253,183

880,290

617,800

1,427,000

16,527,905

2000Total Regular Allowance

16,513,710

2,062,840

1,153,615

968,735

894,500

1,890,157

356,467

614,191

2,354,000

368,950

871,966

377,349

1,306,195

960,645

684,600

1,649,500

16,513,710

3000Total Other Allowance EX. TA

338,987

331,233

3,500

-

-

-

-

-

4,254

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

338,987

3400M

edical338,987

331,233

3,500

4,254

338,987

Leave Salaries-

-

10000Purchase of D-Goods

1,763,700

664,150

103,000

66,400

70,000

-

30,000

40,000

160,000

23,150

110,000

24,000

125,000

135,000

60,000

153,000

-

1,763,700

Purchase of Cycle54,550

8,000

6,400

10,000

3,150

10,000

4,000

13,000

54,550

12000Purchase of M

& E584,150

524,150

10,000

25,000

25,000

584,150

13000Purchase of F & F

1,125,000

140,000

95,000

60,000

70,000

30,000

40,000

140,000

20,000

100,000

20,000

100,000

110,000

60,000

140,000

1,125,000

40000R/M

of D/Goods352,710

56,900

40,000

20,000

-

7,100

1,710

-

43,000

23,000

25,000

18,000

35,000

23,000

12,000

48,000

-

352,710

41000R/M

of Transport33,900

6,900

3,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

5,000

3,000

2,000

8,000

33,900

42000R/M

of M & E

95,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

2,000

3,000

5,000

10,000

10,000

20,000

95,000

43000R/M

of F&F223,810

30,000

25,000

10,000

7,100

1,710

40,000

20,000

20,000

10,000

20,000

10,000

10,000

20,000

223,810

R/M of Building

-

-

50000Com

modities

5,865,510

1,377,807

483,079

318,000

316,500

373,500

103,607

140,500

679,400

190,000

264,885

118,600

249,497

392,835

195,000

662,300

-

5,865,510

51000Transportation

1,996,373

120,067

102,079

150,000

215,000

220,000

38,107

70,000

294,000

80,000

92,200

23,800

44,957

185,835

20,000

337,800

-

1,993,845

51100T.A

1,994,373

118,067

102,079

150,000

215,000

220,000

38,107

70,000

294,000

80,000

92,200

23,800

44,957

185,835

20,000

337,800

1,991,845

Conveyance2,000

2,000

2,000

52000Com

munication

714,300

213,000

56,000

36,000

21,500

47,500

6,500

8,500

100,500

30,000

24,500

39,800

26,000

20,000

47,000

37,500

-

714,300

52100P & T

56,500

5,000

10,000

2,000

2,000

10,000

5,000

5,000

2,500

10,000

5,000

56,500

5200T & T

657,800

213,000

51,000

26,000

19,500

47,500

6,500

6,500

90,500

25,000

19,500

37,300

26,000

20,000

37,000

32,500

657,800

5300Utilities

1,023,540

300,000

115,000

52,000

35,000

41,000

14,000

12,000

95,000

22,000

70,000

15,000

83,540

52,000

10,000

107,000

-

1,023,540

53100G

as160,000

100,000

30,000

10,000

20,000

160,000

53200W

ater22,000

2,000

5,000

10,000

5,000

22,000

533000Electricity

318,540

100,000

30,000

15,000

15,000

10,000

40,000

10,000

40,000

8,540

50,000

318,540

534000Hot & Cold W

/C523,000

100,000

55,000

37,000

20,000

31,000

14,000

12,000

45,000

10,000

30,000

10,000

55,000

42,000

10,000

52,000

523,000

54000Stationary

785,000

200,000

40,000

25,000

20,000

40,000

15,000

15,000

110,000

15,000

35,000

20,000

50,000

70,000

30,000

100,000

785,000

55000Printing

414,100

306,200

15,000

15,000

10,000

19,900

3,000

10,000

5,000

20,000

10,000

414,100

56000Books

320,657

100,000

20,000

20,000

15,000

5,000

10,000

10,000

25,000

25,000

13,185

5,000

10,000

25,000

10,000

30,000

323,185

57000Rent

48,000

48,000

48,000

59000Other

563,540

138,540

135,000

20,000

10,000

20,000

20,000

15,000

35,000

15,000

20,000

10,000

15,000

40,000

20,000

50,000

563,540

Total52,284,450

8,301,455

3,569,816

2,934,074

2,785,700

5,188,422

1,058,699

1,707,599

6,936,997

1,288,860

2,650,652

1,128,959

4,011,927

3,205,970

2,067,520

5,447,800

-

52,284,450

Distribution of Final Budget for Senior Civil Judges, Civil Judges, Mem

ber Majlis-eShoora, Qazis, and Judicial M

agistrates in Balochistan Province for the year 2002-2003 under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts C-II Subordinate Courts


D.F. Object Particulars Allocation Quetta Loralai Sibi Khuzdar Reserve Total

6.210 0000 Total Estt Charges

012 Total Pay of Staff 625,192 432,120 66,420 81,367 45,285 625,192

020 Total Regular Allowance 404,931 268,449 46,992 61,210 28,280 404,931

Total 1,030,123 700,569 113,412 142,577 73,565 - 1,030,123

Distribution of Final Budget for the year 2002-2003 Under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts C-3 Process Serving Estt

Allocation

A-High Court 37,611,893

ATC (Grant in Aid Through High Court) 4,178,646

C-I Sessions Courts 43,953,915

C-II Subordinate Courts 52,284,450

C-III Process Serving 1,030,123

D-4 Labour Courts 4,206,641

Total 143,265,668

Appropriation AccountTotal Final Budget Grant for the year 2002-2003

Under the head 6.210 Justice Law Courts


THIS PAGE BLANK


Court Building and Development Schemes


THIS PAGE BLANK


12 COURT BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES

12.1 Court Building and Security Arrangements

The building of the High Court of Balochistan consists of ten Court rooms with spacious Chambersfor worthy Judges, which are at present sufficient to cater the requirements of the present strengthof Judges, while the remaining rooms left for administrative staff are insufficient to accommodateall the established branches, for which a revised PC-I for extension of the present building as wellas to house Law Officers and some branches of High Court, has been forwarded to the provincialgovernment for inclusion in the ADP 2003-04, which has now been approved and the constructionwork to commence during the year 2004. The additional block on completion would provide largespace in the basement for keeping the record in safe and tidy condition and will be capable of quickretrieval, while the other rooms on three storey building would be utilized for offices of Law Officersand for Branches, which are less important as for the daily working of the Court is concerned. Thebasement on either side of the new building with its roof will be utilized for car parking in a safemanner, and vehicles would not spoil by parking in the open.

The security of the High Court building is assigned to the Provincial Police Department, wherebya contingent of 9 police personnel with one Inspector being security incharge is deployed for thesafety of the building, who keep on alert day and night during their respective duty hours to meetany eventuality and to check the incoming and outgoing public and traffic. Also in the time ofany exigency, a platoon of the police contingent is deployed outside the Court premises for keepingproper security. However, in view of the changing law and order situation in the city, strict measuresare being observed for peace and safety of the staff and building. For this purpose, a revised PC-1has been prepared which would provide for the fixing of the security check panels at entry pointsof the High Court building and for refurbishment of the existing Court building.

12.2 Facilities for Advocates and the Bar

The Advocates of the Supreme Court as well as of the High Court have been provided with wellfurnished Bar rooms; office bearer room for High Court Bar Association in the High Court buildingat Quetta, whereas in all Sessions Court buildings, a large furnished Bar room with limited supplyof law books has also been provided at District Court level. It may be mentioned here that a LawLibrary for lawyers fraternity comprising of two large rooms has also been established in the HighCourt of Balochistan, which do provide Law books and reference material on each essential aspectincluding Islamic Theology to the Advocates and at present the number of quality law books is over8,000. Besides, the Judges Library of the High Court of Balochistan houses over 13,000 law booksprovided primarily for the utility of Judges and Court staff accessible even to the Advocate at large.Also Law journals and upto date law books are being procured on regular basis to keep the readersabreast of the change in laws and latest case law on variety of subjects can be tendered/cited inthe courts of Law. Also a latest computer has been installed in the Judges’ Library, which containsa complete list of available books and easy for the search of any title or contents for reference,while efforts are afoot to provide full time internet connection so that reference material from otherCourts/Law sites can be acquired with ease. The three large library rooms have a calm and quiteatmosphere with tables and chairs for readers to carryout research and reference work with thepeace of their mind.


12.3 Development Schemes

The High Court of Balochistan, for implementation under the Access to Justice Programme, has gotprepared 27 new Schemes (PC-I’s) at a total cost of Rs.445.000 million, out of which the following 19Schemes at a total cost of Rs.291.26 million have been finally approved by the Federal Government,to be constructed under a phased programme in the forthcoming years:

ApprovedCost

S.No. Names of the Schemes (million)1. Construction of Ground Four 2 rooms and 1st flour of Sessions

Court Building Khuzdar.7.830

2. Construction of Residential Accommodation for Judiciary De-partment at Lesbella District.

16.626

3. Construction of Residential Non Residential Accommodation forJudiciary staff at Usta Muhammad.

9.207

4. Construction of three Court rooms along with one number bun-galow of Grade (18-19) ad three number bungalows of Grade(15-17) for Judiciary Department at Loralai.

17.141

5. Construction of Residential/Non Residential accommodation forJudiciary staff at Jafarabad.

9.491

6. Construction of Residential/Non Residential Accommodationfor Judiciary Staff at Nasirabad.

18.624

7. Construction of five rooms Court alongwith two numbers Grade(18-19) and two numbers bungalows Grade (15-17) at Musakhel.

22.572

8. Construction of Grade (18-19) bungalow for Presiding OfficerLabour Court Sibi.

3.344

9. Construction of Residential accommodation for Judiciary atQuetta.

26.669

10. Construction of Court room complex at the Dasht District Mas-tung.

8.927

11. Construction of one room Court of Judicial Magistrate alongwith two number bungalows Grade (15-17) for Judicial Magis-trate and Qazi at Barkhan.

7.672

12. Construction of one room Court along with bungalow Grade(15-17) for Judicial Magistrate at Duki.

5.636

13 Construction of one room Court along with bungalow Grade(15-17) for Judicial Magistrate Sanjavi at Bori.

5.092

14. Construction of three Court room at Hub, two Court room atBela.

19.024

15. Construction of two court room building complex at Dera Bugti. 17.73416. Construction of Court complex at District Kachhi:— 39.208

Const. of three Court room building at Dhadar.Const. of three Court room building at Bhag.Const. of three Court room building at Gandawa.Const. of three Court room building at Mach.


17. Construction of two Court room/complex and residential ac-commodation at Mashkay (District Awaran).

12.234

18. Construction of three numbers additional courts at Sibi & Harni. 19.74719. Construction of Additional Sessions Court Building & Residen-

tial accommodation at Awaran.24.482

Total: 291.26

It may, however be pointed out that until now only 3 schemes at Khuzdar, Lasbella at Hub andUsta Muhammad have been launched, for which, out of a total allocation of Rs.17.000 million, a sumof Rs.14.403 million has been incurred, while the Scheme at Khuzdar to be completed in December,2003 and at Hub in June, 2004, whereas a revised PC-I has to be prepared for the Scheme at UstaMuhammad due to non availability of land at the proposed site. The detail of expenditure in theaforesaid schemes is also annexed at appropriate place in this report.

12.4 Progress Report of Development Schemes Launched Under theAccess to Justice Programme Loan

There are 36 number of approved Development schemes for various Departments being implementedunder the Access to Justice Programme Loan costing Rs.663.754 million. The release/utilizationposition ending November 2003 is as under:—

UTILIZATIO N AG AINST 1ST AND 2ND TRANCH OF RS.48.000 M ILLIO N AND RS.24 M ILLIO N PROVIDED BY FEDERAL

GOVERNM ENT DURING 2002-03 & 2003-04.

S.# Departm ents No. of schem es

ApprovedCost

Releasesm ade so far

Total Expenditure

Rem arks

1. Judiciary

Department.

18 263.974 17.000 14.403 85%

2. Prisons

Department.

11 239.208 18.000 6.500 36%

3. Police

Department.

3 95.578 21.000 20.900 100%

4. Law

Department.

3 7.066 4.500 1.909 45%

5. Levies

Department.

1 57.928 7.500 5.992 80%

Total:- 36 663.754 68.00 49.704 73%


UTILIZATIO N AG AINST 1ST AND 2ND TRANCH OF RS.48.000 M ILLIO N AND RS.24 M ILLIO N PROVIDED BY FEDERAL

GOVERNM ENT DURING 2002-03 & 2003-04.

JUDICIARY DEPARTM ENT

S.# Nam e of Schem e Approved Cost

Release as per 1st

Tranch

Expenditure 6/2003

Release as per 2nd

Tranch

Total Release

TotalExpenditu

re

Rem arks

1. Construction of Ground Floor Two Rooms and First Floor of Sessions Court Building Khuzdar.

Rs.7.578 m Rs.3.00 m Rs.3.00 m Rs.4.578 m Rs.7.578 m Rs.7.403 m To be completed in December 2003

2. Construction of Residential Accommodation for Judiciary Department at Lasbella District.

Rs.16.262 m Rs.7.00 m Rs.7.00 m Rs.2.422 m Rs.9.422 m Rs.7.00 m To be completed in June 2004

3. Construction of Residential/Non Residential Accommodation for Judiciary Staff at Usta M uhammad

Rs.9.207 m Rs.4.00 m

Funds could not be utilized & surrendered. (New PC-I to be prepared).

Total:- Rs.33.047 m Rs.14.0 m Rs.10.00 m Rs.7.00 m Rs.17.00 m Rs.14.403 m -


Former Chief Justices and Judges of the HighCourt of Balochistan


THIS PAGE BLANK


13

FO

RM

ER

CH

IEF

JU

ST

ICES

AN

DJU

DG

ES

OF

TH

EH

IGH

CO

URT

OF

BA

LO

CH

ISTA

N

Dat

eof

Appoi

ntm

ent

Dat

eof

Appoi

ntm

ent

S.N

o.N

ames

ofJu

dge

sas

Judge

asC

hie

fJu

stic

eR

emar

ks

1M

r.Ju

stic

eK

huda

Bak

hsh

Mar

ri21

-10-

1970

01-1

2-19

76to

16-0

7-19

77R

etir

edas

18-0

9-19

78to

25-0

3-19

81C

hief

Just

ice

2M

r.Ju

stic

eA

bdul

Hay

eeQ

ures

hi07

-02-

1972

14-0

7-19

77to

23-0

7-19

78Ju

dge

(Bac

kto

Sind

Hig

hC

ourt

)3

Mr.

Just

ice

M.A

Ras

heed

08-1

0-19

7724

-07-

1978

to18

-09-

1978

Ret

ired

asJu

dge

4M

r.Ju

stic

eZak

aulla

hLod

hi(L

ate)

01-1

2-19

7625

-03-

1981

to19

-10-

1984

Die

dw

hile

Chi

efJu

stic

e5

Mr.

Just

ice

Mir

Haz

arK

han

Kho

so20

-06-

1977

13-1

2-19

89to

29-0

9-19

91R

etir

edas

Chi

efJu

stic

e6

Mr.

Just

ice

Abd

ulQ

adee

rC

haud

hary

20-0

6-19

7720

-10-

1984

to30

-08-

1985

Act

ing

Chi

efJu

stic

e29

-03-

1987

to13

-12-

1989

Ele

vate

dto

Supr

eme

Cou

rt7

Mr.

Just

ice

Muh

amm

adJa

ffar

Nai

m14

-05-

1981

23-0

2-19

85R

etir

edas

Judg

e8

Mr.

Just

ice

Muf

tikh

ar-u

d-D

in(L

ate)

22-0

5-19

82N

ilR

etir

edas

Judg

e(A

ppoi

nted

asJu

dge

Shar

iat

Cou

rton

10-0

3-19

86)(R

etir

edon

09-0

3-19

90)

9M

r.Ju

stic

eA

jmal

Mia

n17

-03-

1980

30-0

3-19

85to

29-0

3-19

87Ju

dge

(Bac

kto

Sind

Hig

hC

ourt

)10

Mr.

Just

ice

Mun

awar

Ahm

edM

irza

31-0

3-19

8529

-09-

1991

to16

-11-

1996

Ele

vate

dto

Supr

eme

Cou

rt11

Mr.

Just

ice

Naz

irA

hmed

Bha

tti

03-0

4-19

8507

-09-

1987

Judg

e(B

ack

toPes

haw

arH

igh

Cou

rt)

12M

r.Ju

stic

eA

mir

-ul-M

ulk

Men

gal

26-0

3-19

8617

-11-

1996

to22

-04-

1999

Ret

ired

asC

hief

Just

ice

13M

r.Ju

stic

eIf

tikh

arM

uham

mad

Cha

udha

ry06

-04-

1990

22-0

4-19

99to

04-0

2-20

00E

leva

ted

toSu

prem

eC

ourt

14M

r.Ju

stic

eM

irM

uham

mad

Naw

azM

arri

(Lat

e)07

-03-

1996

Judg

e(M

urde

red

on07

-01-

2000

)15

Mr.

Just

ice

Jave

dIq

bal

07-0

3-19

9604

-02-

2000

to28

-04-

2000

Ele

vate

dto

Supr

eme

Cou

rt16

Mr.

Just

ice

Tar

iqM

ehm

ood

06-0

9-20

00R

esig

ned

asJu

dge


THIS PAGE BLANK


Photographs


THIS PAGE BLANK


14 PHOTOGRAPHS


high court of balochistan annual report 2003 items/publications/reports of the ljcp/reports... ·...

Documents