' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.--- This Human Right Case has arisen out of a suo motu notice taken by this Court on a news item published in the "Pakistan Daily Times", dated 7-11-2006. The press clipping containing the directive of Prime Minster of Pakistan for allotment of residential plots in Sector D-12, C.D.A., Islamabad to the Federal Secretaries to Government of Pakistan and other senior officers of the Federal Government; is read as under:-- "Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has directed that plots be allocated to an additional 36 officers (Grade-22), following his decision to allot 46 plots to Federal Secretaries, sources said on Monday.
Establishment Division Secretary Tariq Ali Bukhari confirmed that he had received new orders from the Prime Minister Secretariat to submit the plot allotment summary to the P.M. For the remaining 36 Federal Government Officers, Earlier, Aziz had issued plot allotment directives for the Grade-22 Secretaries at the behest of the Secretaries Committee, Federal Minister for Housing and Construction Safawanullah also confirmed the new scheme. The Prime Minister has ordered that D-12 sector plots be allocated to every Federal Secretary (Grade-22) who has held the position for the last 14 months. N.-W.F.P. Chief Secretary Ijaz Qureshi had previously threatened to move a petition before the Court against the plan. Later, however, the Chief Secretaries of Punjab, Balochistan and Sindh as well as the Inspectors-Generals of police (I.-G.P.) for Sindh, N.-W.F.P. And Punjab also demanded plot allotments. It has also been suggested, sources said, that Islamabad- based bureaucrats who have already been allotted plots under Government schemes, could be entitled to additional plot allotments. However, the final decision rests with the Prime Minster, while implementation of the scheme will fall within the purview of the Interior and Housing and Development Ministers, Bureaucrats expected to be awarded plots under the new directives are; seven Grade-22 officers of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, including former High Commissioner to India, Aziz Khan, current Ambassador to Russia Mustafa Kamal and Special Secretary Ministry of Foreign Affairs Sher Afgan; two officers of Audit and Accounts Group, including Chaudhry Ilyas, Director-General Intellectual Property Rights Yasin Tahir; two officers posted to the World Bank, Sabtain Fazal and Sayed Shuja Haider, Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA)
Chairman Tariq Hameed, Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC) Member Muhib Ullah; Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) Chairman Iftikhar Rasheed; National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) Chairman Lt. Gen. (R) Saeed; two members of the Planning Commission; Trading Corporation of Pakistan Chairman Asif Zaman Ansari; Small and Medium Enterpreneurs Development Authority (SMEDA) Chairman Shahab Anwar Khawaja; Punjab Revenue Board Senior Member Safdar Javed; Punjab Planning and Development Chairman Salman Ghani; Election Commission of Pakistan Secretary Kanwar Muhammad Dilshad; Senate Secretary Raja Muhammad Amin; Chief Secretary Sindh Fazalur Rehman; Chief Secretary Punjab Salman Sadique; Chief Secretary, N.-W.F.P. Ijaz Ahmed Qureshi; Chief Secretary Balochistan K.B. Rindh; I.-G.P. Sindh Jehangir Mirza; I.-G.P. N.-W.F.P. Rifat Pasha; and I.-G.P. Punjab Major (R) Ziaul Hassan."
2. The Capital Development Authority in compliance of the direction of this Court, supplied the following information:-- "As directed by Honourable Chief Justice Supreme Court of Pakistan, following are the submissions:--
(a) C.D.A. Has not been issued with any direction about allotment of plots to all Grade-22 Officers, There is no regular scheme for such allotments to Grade-22 officers till the filing of these comments. However, on 27th June, 2006, the Establishment Division moved a summary for the Prime Minister regarding facilities for Federal Secretaries and other civil servants (copy attached).
This summary included a package for consideration and approval of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister Secretariat vide U.O. No,81/0S/Estt/2006, dated 21-7-2006 intimated the Prime Minister's approval of the following package:
(i) Special pay @ 20% of the basic.
(ii) Provision of one orderly on retirement/completion of reemployment on contract.
(iii) Resident plot on payment (in addition to the plot being given on turn through FGEHF) when available.
(b) Based on this approval the Ministry of Interior formulated and eligibility criteria for allotment of the plots which was approved the Prime Minister (copy attached).
(c) The Ministry of Interior vide U.O. No,4/10/2006-CDA-II, dated 28-7-2006 (copy attached) requested Capital Development Authority to make necessary arrangements for allotment of plots.
46 plots of 600 sq. Yard each available in Sector D-12 were placed by the C.D.A. At the disposal of the Federal Government Employees Housing Foundation (FGEHF) as per policy laid down by the Federal Government for further allotment to the eligible Federal Secretaries.
(d) On 2-11-2006, allotment of the plots to Federal Secretaries was made by the FGEHF on reserve rate of Rs,4,500 per square yard to be paid by the allottees in six quarterly instalments (total price Rs,27 lacs) C.D.A. Provided the plots only whereas allotment was made by FGEHF.
(e) The plots in Sector D-12 are undeveloped and under Rule 5(2) of the Land Disposal Regulations, 2005 C.D.A. Can dispose of such plots for the residences of Government Employees. The relevant clause is reproduced:-- "Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (1) the Authority may reserve any land for the residences of Government Employees including employees of C.D.A., autonomous and semi autonomous bodies and for the affectees of Islamabad".
(f) The allotment of plots were made by FGEHF and allotment letters were also issued by the Foundation and the price of these plots is required to be deposited by the allottees in C.D.A.
Accounts.
3. This Court having taken cognizance of the matter issued notice to the concerned authorities in the Federal Government and passed the following order on 24-10-2007:-- "The allottees of the plots have engaged Mr. Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Senior Advocate Supreme Court who is out of country for medical treatment, therefore, a request has been made on his behalf for adjournment of the case.
' Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court for intervener stated that it is necessary to issue notice to the Secretary Establishment to submit parawise comments particularly highlighting the policy along with the competence of the Authority who passed the same without formulating any law or scheme under the relevant provisions of law. In this behalf he, particularly, referred Article 4 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and relied upon the judgment in the case of Jamat-i-Islami Pakistan through Syed Munawar Hussain Secretary General v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Law and MQM through Deputy Convener, Senator Aftab Ahmed Sheikh v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary M/O Interior PLD 2000 SC 111 and stated that it is a case of discrimination.
' D.-G. Housing and Foundation stated that he received orders of the Government of Pakistan, through Secretary Establishment for making allotment of plots. He is directed to file all those documents along with list of the officers of all the departments to whom plots were allotted.
' Let the office, after receipt of the list, issue notices to all of them to show cause under what authority the Government of Pakistan, through Secretary Establishment had directed to the D.-G.
Housing and Foundation for allotment of plots in their favour. D.-G. Housing and Foundation is directed to conduct survey and if such-like plots are purchased by an ordinary person from market then what would be its approximate price."
4. In pursuance of the approval of the Prime Minister of Pakistan of the proposal of allotment of residential plots to the Senior Officers of the Federal Government in C.D.A., Islamabad, the Interior Ministry, Government of Pakistan after determining the eligibility criteria, directed Capital Development Authority (C.D.A.) for allocation of residential plots of the size of 600 sq. Yards each in Sector D-12, C.D.A. For allotment to the eligible senior officers of the Federal Government through Federal Government Employees Housing Foundation (FGEHF). The C.D.A. Allocated certain plots in Sector D-12 (undeveloped) in exercise of the powers under Regulation No,5 of Islamabad Land Disposal Regulation, 2005, which is read as under:--- "5. Residential Plots.--- (1) All residential plots in developed Sectors shall be allotted through open auction. The residential plots in other Sectors shall be disposed of in the following manner:--
(i) Through open balloting at prevalent 75 % market price.
(ii) Federal Government Servants 10% including employees of Federal Autonomous, Semi- Autonomous Bodies
(iii) Defence Services Personnel including Civilians 5% paid out of Defence Estimates
(iv) Deprived Group including widows, orphans, 5% destitute, handicapped persons and persons needing compensation.
(v) C.D.A. Employees 5% 5(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (1) the Authority may reserve any land for the residences of Government employees including employees of C.D.A. Autonomous and semi- autonomous bodies and for the affectees of Islamabad.
5. FGEHF, on completion of the formalities, allotted the plots in question as per policy of the Federal Government against the price fixed by the C.D.A. Payable in six quarterly instalments.
6. Mr. Zafar Iqbal, Law Officer of FGEHF along with Mr. Shahid Hameed, Director-General, FGEHF has submitted that Federal Government Employees Housing Foundation is a registered body which was established under the directive of Prime Minister of Pakistan in the Ministry of Housing and Works, Government of Pakistan, with the aim and object of development of housing schemes in C.D.A.
Area, Islamabad, for the benefit of different categories of employees of Federal Government. He further stated that Housing Foundation in pursuance of the direction of Federal Government, allotted the plots in question to the category of the employees mentioned therein on the basis of eligibility criteria on payment of price fixed by the C.D.A.
7. Mr. Tariq Mehmood Khan, Director (Estt.) C.D.A., submitted that newspaper clipping on the basis of which suo motu action was taken, was misleading and that plots in question were allocated for allotment by the FGEHF against the C.D.A. Price in strict compliance of the direction of the Federal Government and neither any loss was caused to the public exchequer nor any legal right of any person was infringed.
8. The Government is always empowered to grant reasonably appropriate privileges to its employees within the scope of law and its authority, but nevertheless such power, Government is not under legal or constitutional obligation to establish Housing Schemes and provide residential or commercial plots to its employees and similarly it is not a constitutional or legal right of any person in the service of Pakistan to claim such a privilege in addition to the terms and conditions of his service provided under the law. This is, however, prerogative of the Government to grant certain privileges to a particular category of its employees on the basis of reasonable classification and the law is that the Courts should not ordinarily interfere in the matter falling within the exclusive domain of Government or nullify its legal and constitutional authority. The courts may not undo the action taken by the Government in its discretion, unless there is infringement of a legal right, rather the Courts-in the light of aim and object of the action should broadly regard the authority confided in the Government. This is however, well-settled principle of law that discretionary power conferred on the Government should be exercised reasonably and subject to the existence of the essential conditions required for exercise of such powers within the scope of law.
9. The "discretion" means a power or a right conferred upon an authority by law, and when applied to the public functionaries means to exercise power according to the judgment and conscience of such public authorities, but the discretion cannot be given a settled or established meaning, which can be invariably applied in any situation, rather the exercise of discretion is judged in each case on the basis of its own particular facts. The exercise of discretion in discharge of public duty in a manner, which is considered beyond the scope of law or for extraneous consideration is no doubt an abuse of discretionary power and exercise of this power in a manner which exceeds the bonds of authority, may not be immune from the scope of judicial review of the superior Courts in their constitutional jurisdiction, but if the power is exercised in just and proper manner within the bonds of law without infringement of any legal right, the same may not be questionable.
10. In the present case, in consequence to the approval of Prime Minister, C.D.A. On the directive of the Federal Government placed a specified number of residential plots in Sector D-12 at the disposal of FGEHF for allotment to the category of senior officers of the Federal Government on payment of price fixed by the C.D.A. Subject to the fulfilment of eligibility criteria and we find that the Government in just and proper manner exercising its discretionary power, directed for allotment of residential plots to the category of its senior officers within the bonds of law. The grant of the above privileges by the 'Government to its employees was not illegal or beyond the authority of the Government, therefore, in absence of very strong and sound reasons or infringement of a legal right, the interference of the Courts in the matter, may not be legal. This Court, in exercise of the powers under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, may interfere in public interest litigation only in exceptional cases of public importance relating to the enforcement of fundamental rights enshrined in Part-II of Chapter-I of the Constitution, and similarly in case of enforcement of any legal right, the provision of Article 199 of the Constitution can be invoked by an aggrieved person.
The present case does not as such fulfil the test for interference of this Court or the High Court in the constitutional jurisdiction.
11. In the light of foregoing reasons, further proceedings in suo motu action are dropped.