MAIN CASE Irfan Naveed Ghauri, claiming to be the Chairman of Shah Muqeem Press Club (Regd.) has filed this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 by pleading that the petitioner's Press Club is registered with the Registrar, Joint Stock Companies, under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, that when respondent No,3 (Hujra Press Club, Hujra Shah Muqeem, District Okara) through its Chairman, Nawaz Anjum applied for its registration to respondent .No,4 (Registrar, Joint Stock Companies, Okara), petitioner, alongwith seven other persons, filed on the 21st of April, 2003 a civil suit in the Civil Court at Depalpur impleading respondents 3 to 5 herein, alongwith two other persons as defendants, seeking injunction restraining defendants from illegally establishing the Press Club and to get the same registered; that the learned trial Judge passed an injunctive order on 22nd of April, 2003 restraining the defendant% from registering respondent No,3, Hujra Press Club; that in violation of the said order, respondent No,4 recorded registration of respondent No,3, and that since the certificate of incorporation was issued despite restraint order, the same has no legal existence. Further, the case of the petitioner is that on 10th of August, 2003, respondent No,1 who is Chief Minister of the Province of Punjab visited Hujra Shah Muqeem, alongwith respondent No,2, an elected M.P.A. From the said area, presently Minister for Housing and Physical Planning in the Government of the Punjab. The Chief Minister is said to have announced a grant of Rupees one Million to respondent No,3 whereas respondent No,2 announced a grant of Rupees two lac for the said respondent. Simultaneously, respondent No,1 is said to have earmarked a place where the Press Club building is to be constructed, though the site is owned by the Provincial Government and is presently in occupation of Police Department. The grievances voiced by the petitioner are that respondents 1 and 2 have no lawful authority to award public funds, which is a sacred trust with the Government for the benefit of respondent No,3 who has even otherwise no representative capacity, and that without prior permission and sanction of the Board of Revenue, no property belonging to the Provincial Government could be earmarked for construction of a building for the Press Club (respondent No,3). It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has invoked this Court's Constitutional jurisdiction praying that the aforementioned announcements made by respondents Nos.1 and 2 be declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. This Constitutional petition against respondents Nos.1 and 2, who are respectively the Chief Minister and a Minister of the Province of Punjab, is not maintainable as mandated by Article 248(1) of the Constitution, which reads as follows:-- "248. (1) The President, a Governor, the Prime Minister, a Federal Minister, a Minister of State, the Chief Minister and a Provincial Minister shall not be answerable to any Court for the exercise of powers and performance of functions of their respective offices or for any act done or purported to be done in the exercise of those powers and performance of those functions: Provided that nothing in this clause shall be construed as restricting the right of any person to bring appropriate proceedings against the Federation or a Province."
This petition is thus liable to be dismissed on the short ground of being not maintainable.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that the bar contained in the afore-quoted Article 248 is attracted only if the first two respondents could have the power to make the grants complained of. In other words, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said respondents had no lawful authority or power to defray any amount from the Provincial Exchequer.
The entire foundation of this petition rests on a news item which appeared in the Daily JANG, Lahore, in its Issue dated 11th of August, 2003, wherein it was reported that the Chief Minister had announced Rupees one Million for construction of Press Club's building near Police Station. Hujra Shah Muqeem. However, no formal order either of the Chief Minister or of respondent No,2 has been produced, despite the fact that more than a month has elapsed ever-since the alleged announcement. The maintainability of the Constitutional petition on a mere news item, authenticity of which cannot be vouchsafed, in the absence of any order in support thereof, is questionable. Be that as it may, the contention has been raised in ignorance of the provisions contained in Articles 118 to 124 of the Constitution pertaining to Financial Procedure; Provincial Consolidated Fund and Public Accounts; Annual Budget Statement and Supplementary and Excess Grants. In common parlance, Annual Budget Statement is an estimate of receipts and expenditure for a financial year, and by force of Article 120(1) of the Constitution it is laid before the Provincial Assembly. Then, under Article 123(1), the Chief Minister authenticates a schedule by his signatures called the "schedule of authorized expenditure". No expenditure from the Provincial Consolidated Fund can be incurred unless specified in the schedule so authenticated. In cases where expenditures could not be visualized at the time of budget approval, the Provincial Government is competent to sanction supplementary grants to meet any object of expenditure. Article 124 of the Constitution prescribes the mode and manner of sanctioning supplementary grants when the amount authorized to be expended for a particular service for the current financial year is insufficient, or a need has arisen for expenditure on a new service not included in the Annual Budget Statement for that year, or when any money has been spent on any service during the financial year in excess of the amount granted for that service in that year. The Provincial Government has the power to authorize expenditure from the Provincial Consolidated Fund, whether the expenditure is charged by the Constitution upon that Fund or not and has to lay before the Assembly a supplementary Budget Statement or, as the case may be, an excess Budget Statement, setting out the amount of that expenditure and provisions of Articles 120 to 123 have been made applicable to those statements as they apply to the Annual Budget Statement.
4. While taking exception to the grants said to have been announced by respondents Nos.1 and 2, the petitioner has also lost sight of rule 8.15 of the Punjab Financial Rules, Volume I, which indubitably authorizes the Government and Heads of Departments etc., to sanction "Grants-in-aid" and further lays down a comprehensive procedure to carry out the objects of the said rule. It also provides safeguards to ensure proper utilization of the grants-in-aid which are subject to audit in accordance with the general principles and rules prescribed for the audit of expenditure from the revenues of the Government. Needless to add that grants-in-aid sanctioned inter alia to Press Clubs, Bar Associations, Cultural Associations, and N.G.Os. Etc., are covered by rule 8.15 ibid, and, therefore, the contention of the petitioner that respondents Nos.1 and 2 had no lawful authority to sanction the amounts afore mentioned for the Press Club at Hujra Shah Muqeem, has no legs to stand upon.
5. So far as the contention of the learned counsel that without prior approval and sanction of the Board of Revenue, no property belonging to the Provincial Government could be given to the Press Club is concerned, as mentioned above, no formal order has been placed on record and the news item which is the anchor-sheet of this Constitutional petition conspicuously omits any mention of parting with the Government property. All that is mentioned in the news item is that the Chief Minister had laid the foundation stone of the building of Press Club. At any rate, the contention raised would necessarily require holding, of a factual enquiry which exercise cannot be undertaken by this Court in the present summary proceedings under Article 199 of the Constitution.
6. Doubtless, registration of respondent No,3 dates back to 5-5-2003 whereas the petitioner has been accorded registration thereafter, on 13-6-2003. Even then, assuming for the sake of argument, that the petitioner succeeds in establishing that it is his right to occupy the Press Club building, the petitioner is not an aggrieved person within the meaning of Article 199(1)(a) of the Constitution because ultimately the successful party shall be the beneficiary of the grants announced by the first two respondents. For this reason also, the petition in hand is not maintainable.
7. Though grievance has been made in the body of the petition that certificate of incorporation of respondent No,3 was issued in violation of the injunctive order issued by the learned Civil Judge seized of the suit filed by Irfan Naveed Ghauri, alongwith others, but no arguments were addressed at the time of hearing of the petition, obviously for the reasons that the suit is still pending; that when the order of injunction was passed on 22-4-2003, the suit was adjourned to 6-5-2003 but before that date, on 5-5-2003, certificate of incorporation was issued in favour of respondent No,3,without there being anything on record in proof of service of respondent No,4, rather the order sheet showing that the summons had been received back unserved, and, at any rate, an alternate efficacious remedy under Order XXXIX, rule 2(3), C.P.C. Being available to the petitioner. In case he can successfully prove that there was, in fact, disobedience or breach of the restraint order appropriate relief can be granted to the petitioner, including restoration of status quo ante, but the same is not possible, without recording evidence, and such an exercise cannot be undertaken in Constitutional jurisdiction.
8. The upshot of the above discussion is that this petition is devoid of any merit and is, therefore, dismissed in limine. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.