The brief facts out of which present petition arises are that the petitioner filed complaint before the Wafaqi Mohtasab Ala, who accepted the same vide order dated 21.5.2003. Thereafter, the respondents agency filed review petition before the Wafaqi Mohtasab Ala, which was also dismissed. Thereafter the respondents agency filed representation before the higher authority under the previsions of President Order No, I, 1983, which was accepted by the appellate authority vide impugned order dated 5.1.2005. The petitioner being aggrieved filed this writ petition.
2. The learned counsel of the petitioner submits that the respondents passed the impugned order without application of mind and without issuance of any notice to the petitioner, therefore, the impugned order is without lawful authority.
3. The Deputy Attorney General entered appearance on Court's call, he submits that the respondents have passed the impugned order in the administrative capacity, therefore, it is not necessary for the respondents to provide personal hearing to the petitioner. He further submits that the respondents have passed the impugned order with cogent reasons as is evident from the contents of impugned order. He further submits that it is not possible for the appellate authority to provide hearing to the petitioner at the time of deciding the representation; therefore, the impugned order is valid. He further submits that the impugned order falls within the parameters prescribed by this Court, therefore, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of learned counsel of the parties and perused the record.
5. The impugned order itself reveals that the respondents passed the same without providing proper hearing to the petitioner, therefore, the same is hit by the principle of natural justice. It is settled principle of law that principle of natural justice must be read in each and every statute unless and until it is prohibited by wording of statute itself, as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in "Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Fazal-ur-Rehman" (PLD 1964 SC 410). The impugned order was passed by respondents without providing proper hearing to the petitioner, therefore, the same is hit by principle of natural justice as per principle laid down in the following judgments:-- "Zakir Ahmad vs. University of Dhacca" (PLD 1965 S.C. 90); "Pakistan Chrome Mines Ltd. vs. Inquiry Officer" (1983 S.C.M.R. 1208); "Pakistan and others vs. Public-at-large, etc." (PLD 1987 S.C. 304); "Federation of Pak. Muhammad Tariq Pirzada." (1999 SCMR 2189); "Federation of Pak. Muhammad Tariq Pirzada." (1999 SCMR 2744); 'Mst, Nusrat Imtiaz vs. Government of Pakistan" (NLR 2000 Civil 54); "M/s. Eastern Leather Co. vs. Raja Qamar Sultan S.0." (PLD 2004 Lahore 83).
I have taken aforesaid view in the various constitutional petition, therefore, I am not in a position to deviate from my own view on the well known principle of consistency, as per principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Muzaffar Khan's case" (PLD 1959 SC 9).
6. In view of what has been discussed above, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law as the same is not in consonance with law laid down by the Superior Courts, which is hit by the principle of natural justice and the same is set-aside. The impugned order is "set-aside on technical ground, therefore, the petitioner is directed to appear before Raja Qamar Sultan, Section Officer. Government of Pakistan Law, Justice and Human Rights Division, Islamabad in his office at 11.00 a.m. on 9.5.2005, who is directed to hear the petitioner, representatives of the respondents and any other person, who would be aggrieved by his recommendations and thereafter send the representation of the agency/respondents alongwith his recommendations to the competent authority concerned for necessary action and compliance.
7. The learned counsel of the petitioner is directed to hand over copy of this writ petition alongwith all the annexures to Mr. Yawar Ali, Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan, who is directed to send the same to aforesaid Section Officer for necessary action and compliance. Office is also directed to provide one copy of this order to the aforesaid learned law officer for onward transmission to the aforesaid Section Officer for necessary action and compliance.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.