RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- Petitioners are aggrieved by a Division Bench judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 28-7-2004, passed in I.C.A. Against the order dated 6-7-2004, passed by a learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court.
2. While the learned Single Judge dismissed the constitutional petition of the respondent, as being incompetent Division Bench allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and declared the order, dated 24-6-2004 passed by petitioner No,1, as illegal and void, directing the petitioners to extend visa of the respondent for a further period of four years. Respondent, a Sudani national, has been managing and rendering the affairs of Qatar Charitable Society, an N.G.O. At Islamabad and staying in Pakistan under a valid permit/visa. On expiry of the period of his visa, he pleaded for extension thereof which was declined and the permission already granted cancelled on the basis of certain allegations and adverse reports against him. He challenged the action of the petitioners through a constitutional petition which was dismissed as aforesaid. He, however, succeeded in appeal before a Bench of the High Court, hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. We have heard Mr. Nasir Saeed Sheikh, learned D.A.-G. For Pakistan and Dr. Babar Awan, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the respondent.
4. With reference to section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and Article 3(3) of Foreigners Order, 1951, learned D.A.-G. Contended with vehemence that it is the prerogative of the Federal Government to permit or refuse any foreign national to enter into Pakistan and to deport him on expiry of the visa granted to him. Under the law Government is competent even to cancel visa already granted which is not a justiciable issue before the superior Courts under the provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution. Precisely, the thrust of the argument appears to be that it is a privilege and not the right of a foreigner to be enforced through a constitutional petition and it lay in the absolute domain and discretion of the Federal . Government to permit entry or refuse it within the parameters of the law. Learned D.A.-G. Pointed out that while Single Judge rightly held that constitutional petition of the respondent was not maintainable at law, Division Bench of the High Court without adverting to this important question of law set aside the action of the Federal Government and arbitrarily directed the grant of visa to the respondent for a period of four years.
5. Reference has been made to the decided cases from Peshawar, Sindh and Lahore jurisdiction reported as Wang Lilly v. Ministry of Interior Islamabad and others PLJ 1997 Lah. 1782, Jean Charles Groosen v. State of Pakistan through the Secretary, Ministry of Interior, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad PLD 1980 Pesh. 275 and Muhammad Ali and another v. Government of Sindh through Chief Secretary and 2 others 1986 CLC 1123.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the questions of law raised at the bar being of first impression an authoritative judgment by this Court would be called for.
Indeed a fit case for the grant of leave is made out. We order accordingly.
7. Appeal be listed for hearing at an early date.