SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.--- Mr. Abdus Sattar Chughtai Malik, Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan, a Member of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan has filed this petition praying that "petition in hand may please be accepted, consequently amendment of Rule 9(a) in respect of reduction of the tenure qua the Supreme Court Bar Association from two years to one year approved by the Association vide Meeting dated 28-2-2003 (Annexure "A") may kindly be declared illegal, unlawful and inoperative, resultantly Notice of the meeting dated 27-9-2006 (Annexure "C") may also be declared without lawful authority and be set aside in the interest of justice". Such a prayer has been made on his plea and view of the matter that the amendment carried out in the Rules viz., Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989 whereby the term of the Executive Committee and Office-Bearers was reduced to one year from two years was not consistent with the rules inasmuch as that no due notice was given nor any agenda was issued for such purpose and that even the quorum requirement was not met. It is pleaded in the petition that "Tenure of the association is very material in order to achieve objects thereof", and that the "Age of one year for such association is ridiculously low and deficient for performing its obligations with its ultimate goals". He has also highlighted the achievements' of the current Executive Committee and Office-Bearers as "Needless to say that sitting association first time in its history scaled number of welfare goals, details thereof may burden the petition with heavy list. It may be appreciated that allotment of 12 Kanals plot situated in the Constitutional Avenue may remain useless unless, construction of the building of Bar Association is achieved by the sitting association so is the case of allocation of the colonies for the Supreme Court Lawyers in their working areas."
2. Though the case was still at initial/motion stage yet Mr. Ali Akbar Qureshi Secretary Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan who was asked to produce the rules and Mr. Zaka-ur-Rehman, Vice President (Punjab), Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan have entered appearance who state that the amendment so made in the Rules i,e, Rules 8, 9 and 12 serve the best interest of the members inasmuch as that it enables and ensures the Members belonging to all Provinces an opportunity of representation through a democratic process of election. It is also pointed out by them that office bearers of all the Bar Associations in the country have term of one year. They have also challenged the locus standi of the petitioner to raise this issue through this petition particularly when the election program of the forthcoming election has already been issued on 12-9-2006.
3. Besides the objection as to the locus standi of the petitioner who is neither an Office Bearer nor Member of the Executive Committee, it is worth noting that none of the incumbent Office Bearer or Member of the Executive Committee have felt aggrieved of such an amendment in the rules. I have been told that the membership of the association is presently 1580, who hail from all over the country and only the petitioner, seeks to assail the same which is in existence since 4th of July 2003. Not only number of elections have taken place thereafter even the petitioner might have participated by casting vote. The acceptability of such amendment of rules is manifest from the fact that none-else than the petitioner has assailed the same. One of the Members of the Executive Committee (Rana A. Hameed Talib, Advocate) had filed a petition of the nature but withdrew the same and the petition was dismissed on 18-9-2006 accordingly. All members of the Supreme Court Bar Association are advocates of the apex Court who have attained such a status after practicing law for substantially long period and experience. I cannot assume that they would have overlooked or ignored the rules prescribing procedure for amendment as provided by Rule 43.
Indeed except assertion in the petition no data/sufficient material has been placed on record, even to infer that compliance of rules was not made at the time of amendment: It is well known that writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised merely on assumptions. So far as the contention of the learned counsel that Office Bearers and Executive Committee should have term of two years for completing their agenda and developmental program is concerned, suffice it to observe that for all elected offices including Associations like the Supreme Court Bat Association, the Members of Senate, National Assembly and Provincial Assemblies even have their terms of office fixed by the relevant laws. The term cannot sought to be extended merely on the assumption that the successor would not be in a position to complete the agenda or carry out the developmental activity.
In view of the above, I find no merit in this petition which is dismissed accordingly.