Punjab bar council is autonomous body and writ is not maintainable against Bar councils.
بار کونسل کی خود مختاری اور آرٹیکل 199 کے تحت درخواست کی ناقابلِ سماعتی
تعارف
لاہور ہائی کورٹ میں ایک آئینی درخواست دائر کی گئی جس میں مدعی، مرتیب علی علوی، پنجاب بار کونسل کے خلاف یہ حکم جاری کرنے کی درخواست کر رہا تھا کہ اسے جنرل فنڈ اور بینیولنٹ فنڈ کی غیر مناسب فیس نہ وصول کی جائے اور فوری طور پر بار کونسل کا لائسنس جاری کیا جائے۔
ابتدائی اعتراض
بار کونسل کے وکیل نے ابتدائی طور پر اعتراض اٹھایا کہ چونکہ پنجاب بار کونسل وفاق، صوبے یا کسی مقامی اتھارٹی کے امور سے متعلق کوئی فنکشن انجام نہیں دے رہی، لہٰذا یہ آئینی درخواست قابل سماعت نہیں ہے۔
مدعی کا موقف
مدعی نے جواب دیا کہ چونکہ پنجاب بار کونسل پارلیمنٹ کے ایک قانون، یعنی "دی لیگل پریکٹیشنرز اینڈ بار کونسلز ایکٹ، 1973" کے تحت قائم کی گئی ہے، اس لیے یہ آئینی درخواست قابل سماعت ہے۔
سابقہ عدالتی فیصلے
پاکستان بار کونسل کے خلاف آئینی درخواست کی قابل سماعتی کا سوال سپریم کورٹ میں بھی زیر غور آیا، جس میں عدالت نے واضح کیا کہ پاکستان بار کونسل ایک خودمختار ادارہ ہے جو اپنی فنڈنگ خود پیدا کرتا ہے اور حکومت کا کوئی کنٹرول نہیں رکھتا۔ لہٰذا یہ آرٹیکل 199 کے تحت عدالت کی آئینی دائرہ اختیار میں نہیں آتا۔
سپریم کورٹ کی تشریح
سپریم کورٹ نے واضح کیا کہ بنیادی حقوق زیادہ تر ریاست کے خلاف نافذ کیے جا سکتے ہیں، نہ کہ نجی اداروں کے خلاف۔ چونکہ بار کونسل ایک خودمختار نجی ادارہ ہے، اس لیے اس کے خلاف آئینی درخواست ناقابل سماعت ہے۔
پنجاب بار کونسل کی خودمختاری
پاکستان بار کونسل اور صوبائی بار کونسلز، بشمول پنجاب بار کونسل، "لیگل پریکٹیشنرز اینڈ بار کونسلز ایکٹ، 1973" کے تحت قائم کی گئی ہیں۔ ان کے فنکشنز، رکنیت کے معیار اور کمیٹیوں کے اختیارات قانون میں واضح ہیں۔ پنجاب بار کونسل بھی ایک خودمختار ادارہ ہے اور اپنی فنڈنگ خود پیدا کرتی ہے، جس پر وفاق یا صوبائی حکومت کا کوئی کنٹرول نہیں ہے۔
عدالتی نتیجہ
چنانچہ، پنجاب بار کونسل ایک خودمختار ادارہ ہونے کی وجہ سے آرٹیکل 199 کے تحت دائر کی گئی آئینی درخواست ناقابل سماعت ہے۔ لاہور ہائی کورٹ نے ابتدائی اعتراض کو درست قرار دیتے ہوئے یہ درخواست خارج کر دی۔
نتیجہ
یہ فیصلہ واضح کرتا ہے کہ صوبائی یا پاکستان بار کونسل جیسے خودمختار اداروں کے خلاف آرٹیکل 199 کے تحت آئینی درخواستیں دائر نہیں کی جا سکتیں، کیونکہ یہ ادارے ریاست یا مقامی اتھارٹی کے امور میں براہ راست ملوث نہیں ہوتے۔
Must read Judgement
Stereo. HCJDA.38.
Judgment Sheet.
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.
Case No. Writ Petition No.63835/2021
Maratib Ali Alvi
(Petitioner)
Versus
The Punjab Bar Council
(Respondent)
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing
26.01.2022
Petitioner by
Petitioner in person.
Respondent by
Barrister Tayeeb Jan, Assistant
Advocate-General, Punjab.
ABID AZIZ SHEIKH, J.:- This Constitutional petition has
been filed against the Punjab Bar Council for directing it, not to
charge exorbitant amount of subscription of General Fund and
Benevolent Fund and consequently issue Bar Council license
forthwith to the petitioner.
2.
Learned Law Officer, at the very outset, raised preliminary
objection that Punjab Bar Council being not performing any
function in connection with the affairs of the Federation, a Province
or local authority, this Constitutional petition is not maintainable.
3.
The petitioner in response to the above preliminary objection
submits that as Punjab Bar Council has been established under the
Act of the Parliament, namely, “The Legal Practitioners and Bar
Councils Act, 1973”, therefore, this Constitutional petition is
maintainable.
4.
I have heard the petitioner and learned Law Officer on the
threshold question of maintainability of this Constitutional petition.
W.P.No.63835/2021
2
5.
Similar question of maintainability of writ petition against
Pakistan Bar Council came up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
Pakistan in the case of “Syed IQBAL HUSSAIN SHAH GILLANI
Versus PAKISTAN BAR COUNCIL through Secretary, Supreme
Court Bar Building, Islamabad and others” (2021 SCMR 425),
where after detailed discussion the Hon’ble apex Court held that the
Pakistan Bar Council is an autonomous body generating its own
fund without any Government control, thus, not amenable to the
Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the
Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (Constitution).
The relevant extracts from the aforesaid judgment are reproduced as
under:-
“7.
Pakistan Bar Council is a body established under an Act of
Parliament namely "The Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act,
1973" ("Act of 1973"), whereas, the SCBAP is an association of
Supreme Court Lawyers, working under the control of the Pakistan Bar
Council. The Act of 1973 provides for the establishment of the Bar
Council as well as matters relating to elections, disciplinary
proceedings, constitution formation and powers of the committees and
all other relevant matters. A bare reading of the 1973 Act reveals that
other than the Attorney General for Pakistan being the ex-officio
Chairman Pakistan Bar Council, nothing in the Act suggests any
administrative control being exercised by the Federal or Provincial
Government over the affairs of the PBC. The PBC is an entirely
autonomous body which has independent elections and generates its
own funding without any Government control. Thus, the State does not
have any financial or other interests in the affairs of the PBC, nor does
it perform any function in connection with the affairs of the Federation,
a Province or a local authority.
14.
In addition, it must be noted that it is settled law that
fundamental rights are by and large (very exceptional circumstances
apart) are enforceable against the State and not against private
individuals. The Petitioner however seeks relief against the Executive
Committee Pakistan Bar Council, which is an autonomous private body
and not a State institution. Therefore, an argument regarding the
enforceability of fundamental rights against such a body is flawed at
the outset. Accordingly, we hold that a constitutional petition against
Pakistan Bar Council or its Executive Committee is not maintainable
under Article 199(1)(c) of the Constitution.”
6.
The same principle was also laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of “Mirza MUHAMMAD
NAZAKAT BAIG Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through
Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and another”
(2020 SCMR 631), where it is held as under:-
W.P.No.63835/2021
3
“A bare reading of the provisions of the Legal Practitioners and Bar
Councils Act shows that the Act provides for establishment of Bar
Councils in the Provinces as well as the Islamabad Capital Territory. It
deals with all matters relating to elections of office bearers,
disciplinary and other professional matters, constitution of committees,
their powers and other related and incidental matters. However, it is
clear that other than the Attorney General for Pakistan being the exofficio, Chairman Pakistan Bar Council and Advocates Generals of the
Provinces and Islamabad Capital Territory being ex-officio, Chairman
of the Provincial Bar Councils and Islamabad Capital Territory neither
the Provincial nor the Federal Government exercise any administrative
control over the affairs of the Pakistan Bar Council or the Provincial
Bar Councils. Pakistan Bar Council is a statutory body which is
autonomous and generates its own funds independently. The
Government does not have any control over it. Likewise, the Islamabad
Bar Council acts as a regulator for affairs of the Advocates in
Islamabad Capital Territory, admits Advocates to practice before the
said High Court and maintains rolls of such Advocates. The functions
of the Council also interalia include initiating proceedings for
misconduct against Advocates on its rolls and award punishment in
such cases. That being so, neither the Respondent nor any of its
constituents or committees can be regarded as persons performing
functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation, Provinces or
Local Authority within the contemplation of the Article 199 of the
Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. As such we are in no
manner of doubt that Respondent No.2 is not amenable to the
jurisdiction of the High Court in terms of Article 199 of the
Constitution”.
7.
The Pakistan Bar Council and Provincial Bar Councils
including Punjab Bar Council are established under the provisions
of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 (Act). Under
Section 5 of the Act, the Provincial Bar Council shall consist of
Advocate-General of the Province and such number of members as
may be elected by the Advocates on Provincial roll. The
qualification and disqualification for membership of Provincial Bar
Council and functions of the Provincial Bar Councils are prescribed
in Sections 5 to 9 of the Act and Standing Committees of Provincial
Bar Councils are constituted under Section 10 of the Act. Similarly,
the composition of Pakistan Bar Council, qualification of its
members and functions are prescribed in Sections 11 to 15 of the
Act. The remaining provisions including Section 17 of the Act
(which is regarding funding of the Bar Councils), are general
provisions relating to both the Pakistan and Provincial Bar
Councils. Under the provision of the Act like Pakistan Bar Council,
the Punjab Bar Council is also a statutory body but same is
autonomous and generates its own funds independently.
W.P.No.63835/2021
4
8.
Other than the Advocate General of Province being the exofficio member and Chairman of the Punjab Bar Council, nothing
in the Act suggests that any administrative or financial control is
being exercised by the Federal or Provincial governments over the
affairs of the Punjab Bar Council. Thus Punjab Bar Council is not
performing any functions in connection with affairs of the
Federation or Province or a local authority. Therefore, for the
purpose of maintainability of this Constitutional petition, the status
of the Punjab Bar Council will be same as that of the status of the
Pakistan Bar Council as settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
Pakistan in the cases of Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani and Mirza
Muhammad Nizakat Baig (supra).
9.
The law settled in the afore-noted judgments by Hon’ble
Supreme Court is squarely applicable to the Punjab Bar Council,
which is also an autonomous private body without any Government
control, though constituted under the Act, hence this Constitutional
petition against Punjab Bar Council is not maintainable. The same
view was also expressed by this Court in the recent judgment dated
05.01.2022, passed in Writ Petition No.228 of 2022, titled “Sardar
Qurban Ali Dogar v/s Pakistan Bar Council and others”.
10. In view of above discussion, the preliminary objection of
maintainability of this writ petition against Punjab Bar Council is
sustained and this writ petition is dismissed being not maintainable.
(ABID AZIZ SHEIKH)
JUDGE.
APPROVED FOR REPORTING.
M.Sajid.
JU