1. ' SYED MANZOOR HUSSAIN GILANI, C J.---The above captioned petitions are filed under section 44 of the Azad Jam-in and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 calling in question the circular dated October 6, 2001 issued by Muslim Commercial Bank regulating consolidation of different branches of the Bank in different places in Azad Kashmir. The branch licensing policy of the State Bank of Pakistan issued on 17-3-2001 is also called in question. As both the petitions raise common question of facts and law, as such, were heard together and decided through this judgment.
2. ' The facts giving rise to the filings of these petitions are that the petitioners claim to be the State subject and holders of the accounts with Muslim Commercial Bank (hereinafter shall be referred MCB). It is alleged that different branches of MCB had been opened in Azad Kashmir at different places for public convenience some of which are the places where the petitioners had opened their accounts. These branches are now closed and merged with the branches working in other areas. The Bank, MCB under the policy of the merger of banks issued by the State Bank of Pakistan on March 17, 2001, merged the branches of the banks situated at the places mentioned in Columns 1 to 15 with the other branches mentioned in the same notification. It is alleged that petitioners are adversely effected by shifting the branches and that the policy of the State Bank allowing the banks to merge or close the branches is without lawful authority.
3. ' The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the branches of the bank have been opened at different places as to facilitate the general public and carry on day to day business. It is alleged that the banks do earn the profit but avoid payment of the Income Tax and the branches are closed to avoid the tax otherwise there is no administrative interest involved in closing or merging the branches with the other branches. Learned counsel contended that the banks have been established under the Banking Companies Ordinance, 1962 and the State Bank is designated as Authority to lay down the policy in respect of the banks. However, according to the learned Advocates, as the law relating to the banks in Azad Kashmir is adopted by AJ&K Council, hence the banks which perform their functions within affairs of the State, their closer effects the interest of the petitioners, hence this Court has the jurisdiction to quash the closer order. The learned Advocate further contended that the policy of the State Bank given in para. 4 of the Bank Licensing policy and the notification dated March, 17, 2001 is mala fide and against law in force as the interest of the account holders had not been kept in view while issuing the policy. It is also contended that the Council has not issued the policy, hence the closer is without lawful authority.
4. ' The learned Advocates appearing for the respondents opposed the petitions first on the ground of jursidiction and secondly that the merger of the banks is strictly in accordance with the policy of the State Bank which is the controlling authority of the banks, hence no violation is committed. The learned Advocates appearing for the respondents placed reliance on 2000 PLC (C.S.) 930 and contended the High Court does not have the jurisdiction over the matter. The learned Advocates also contended that the petition filed by the Genuine Rights Commission is not competent as the Commission is not registered and the petitioner being a non-registered person is not competent to file the petition.
5. ' After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I have gone through the policy of the State Bank and other documents.
6. ' This is the admitted position that the banks established in Pakistan are performing functions in Azad Kashmir and their conduct of business is coordinated by Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council under Item 14 of Schedule III of the Constitution of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council has no other authority or power beyond the coordination. Under law the State Bank of Pakistan has the sole authority to lay down the policies with respect to the establishment, consolidation or winding up of all the banks including MCB. The State Bank in its policy dated March 17, 2001 has authorized the banks to close any of their branches existing or operating at banking places without prior approval of the State Bank of Pakistan. The following para being relevant is reproduced:-- "Banks will be free to close any of their existing branches operating at banked placed, without obtaining prior appr6val of State Bank of Pakistan. Banks will also be free to close any of their existing branches in unbanked area provided the area is not left without any alternate arrangement for provision of banking services to the local community. A place/area will deem to be unbanked place of no branch if any other bank is operating within a radius of 5 K.Ms. The closure of the branch should be intimated to the Sate Bank of Pakistan on the prescribed pro forma (Annexure "D") within twenty one (21) days of the closure of the branch, simultaneously surrendering the licence of the branch to the State Bank. MCB/DNCBs (HBL, NBP, UBL, MCB & ABL) will be allowed to consolidate their existing branch network outside the framework of branch licensing policy. Accordingly, these banks will be allowed to voluntarily close down any branch(es) at banked or unbanked place under their branch rationalization plan during 2001 (i,e, up to 31-12- 2001). While these banks will not be allowed to open additional branches during the next two calendar years i,e,up to 31-12-2002 they will be allowed to relocate any of their existing branch on country vide basis."
7. ' The perusal of the above para reveals that the State Bank of Pakistan has authorized the banks to close any of their branches within the spirit of the above stated policy. The policy does not oblige the relevant bank to first call upon the depositors or the account holders to wind up or withdraw their accounts neither is the bank obliged to hear any of the account holders. Irrespective of that the banks have not been closed so as to deprive the account holders but the branches of the bank which in the estimation of the management need not have been at a particular place or are not running properly and profitably can be merged with the banks existing at other places. The branches of the other banks do operate in the area where from the branches of the MCB have been closed, it is open to the account holders or depositors to either maintain their accounts with the MCB in the area where the relevant branch is or withdraw it from there and open it in the other bank operating in the area where the account holders reside.
8. Policy issued by the State Bank of Pakistan operates throughout the country and applies to all equally. M.C.B. Is registered in Pakistan and its branches are spread all over the country including Azad Kashmir so as to facilitate the business of inhabitants of Azad Kashmir. State Bank controls the licensing policy of the Banks and once it issues a policy it applies to all the banks wherever they are. It does not need ratification or adaptation by the Council as it only coordinates the business.
9. The argument that Azad Kashmir is not a part of Pakistan, hence it does not apply in Azad Kashmir unless the Council adopts it, is . Therefore, devoid of force. Moreover, Azad Kashmir is a territory included in Pakistan in view of Article 1(2)(d) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. It can, therefore, not be said that the State Bank is foreign Bank or that the Azad Kashmir is a foreign territory for Pakistan or vice-verse. The policy impugned before the Court does not in any way infringe any of the rights of the petitioners as it regulates the business of the banks it does not effect the account holders neither is it issued against the account holders. If a bank feels that a particular branch of the bank does not run in profit or is not in the interest of the bank to be kept at a particular place, it is open to the bank to close it, however, strictly in accordance with the policy impugned before the Court, unless otherwise agreed with the Council or the Government at the time of opening of the branch. As stated above that the branches of the other banks are running in the areas wherefrom the MCB has closed its branches, the closure is, therefore, in accordance with policy.
10. ' In view of above, I do not feel it proper to admit the petitions just for the sake of detailed examination when the petitions ultimately are to be dismissed.
11. ' I view of above, finding no force in these petitions, these are hereby dismissed in limine, however, without any order as to costs.