1. ' GHULAM MUSTAFA MENGAL, J.--- Through this constitutional petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:---
(a) That the peoples of the area along with Kech River and Mirani Dam are entitled for steps to protect their life and property due to construction of Mirani Dam and entitled for protection from flood.
(b) The official respondents may be directed to take measures and construct protection wall to protect the people and their land from the flood.
(c) That the official respondents be directed to pay compensation for the damage they suffered due to flood.
(d) Any other relief as may be deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded.
2. ' Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Mirani Dam was constructed by the WAPDA, which is approximately 30 Kilometers from the Village Union Council Kosh Kalat and other villages. It is the case of petitioner that on 26th of June, 2007 due to heavy rain falls peoples of the area suffered heavy losses due to non-construction of protection wall, in spite of the fact that the Irrigation department and WAPDA authorities assured the people of the area of Kosh Kalat that they will construct a Protection Wall but the same was not constructed. It is also the case of petitioner that Spillway of Mirani Dam was also sma ll and water could not be discharged in proper quantity. The petitioner approached the Project Director, Mirani Dam and Irrigation Department authorities for construction of protection wall, as the life and properties of the peoples of the area residing and having agricultural lands on both sides of the river Kech are in danger, unless steps not taken to protect the life and properties of the area, hence this petition.
3. ' Notice was given to the respondents who in response to the notices filed separate parawise comments. According to respondents the damages/loss was not caused due to non-construction of protection wall but due to cyclone generated in the bay of Bengal and extraordinary rainfall 177 m.m. Was recorded in Torbat, which has never been recorded in the past 10,000 yeaRs, Kosh Kalat is situated on the left bank of Kech River. The heavy forest in the Kech Kore acts as a barrier in the way of flood and due to this barrier the flood water heads up and over topes the flood protection Bund which is constructed for the protection of Kosh Kalat. That was the reason, that Kosh Kalat suffered heavy damages/losses in the flood of 1998. It was further stated that the Government of Balochistan, Irrigation and Power 'Department has prepared a PC-1 for flood protection of left and right Banks of Kech Kore is costing Rs,84 million, which has already been approved by the Federal Government in Federal PSDP during 2009-10 and the work on Construction of Flood Protection Bund is under progress and 40% Physical work has been completed since 2009-2010. This fact is also admitted by the petitioner in para 5 of his petition.
4. ' We have heard the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate-General. At the very outset the learned Advocate-General raised objection on the maintainability of the instant petition.
5. Accordingly to him the petitioner has filed the instant petition in representative capacity without permission of this Court and notice to the all concerned, as required under Order I, Rule 8, C.P.C. He further contended that this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan can neither enter into factual controversies nor decide disputed question of facts.
6. ' At the first instance, we would like to deal with the objection of learned Advocate-General. The objection so raised is too technical in nature. Petitioner is a local of Kosh Kalat. The documents appended with the petition reflect that almost on all occasion petitioner has been representing the people of area as far as this particular grievance is concerned. Even otherwise the State is under constitutional obligation to protect the life, liberty and property of people of Pakistan. According to Articles 9 and 24 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the State has to discharge its constitutional obligations, therefore, the objection of learned Advocate-General is overruled and Constitution petition is found to be maintainable. Articles 9 and 24 of the Constitution is reproduced herein below:--- "9. No person shall be deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law.
24. (1) No person shall be deprived of his property save in accordance with law.
(2) No property shall be compulsorily acquired or taken possession of save for a public purpose, and save .By the authority of law which provides for compensation therefor and either fixes the amount of compensation or specifies the principles on and the manner in which compensation is to be determined and given.
(3) Nothing in this Article shall affect the validity of--
(a) any law permitting the compulsory acquisition or taking possession of any property for preventing danger to life, property or public health; or
(b) any law permitting the taking over of any property which has been acquired by, or come into the possession of, any person by any unfair means, or in any manner, contrary to law; or
(c) any law relating to the acquisition, administration or disposal of any property which is or is deemed to be enemy property or evacuee property under any law (not being property which has ceased to be evacuee property under any law); or
(d) any law providing for the taking over of the management of any property by the State for a limited period, either in the public interest or in order to secure the proper management of the property, or for the benefit of its owner; or
(e) any law providing for the acquisition of any class of property for the purpose of--
(i) providing education and medical aid to all or any specified class of citizens; or
(ii) providing housing and public facilities and services such as roads, water supply, sewerage, gas and electric power to all or any specified class of citizens; or
(iii) providing maintenance to those who, on account of unemployment, sickness, infirmity or old age, are unable to maintain themsevles; or
(f) any existing law or any law made in pursuance of Article 253.
(4) The adequacy or otherwise of any compensation provided for by any such law as is referred to in this Article, or determined in pursuance thereof, shall not be called in question in any Court.
7. ' The parawise comments filed by the respondent reflect that factually the inhabitants of the area approached a genuine threat to their lives and properties on account of flood in river Kech that is why the construction of protection wall has felt necessary and the construction thereof has been started. We expect that the construction shall be completed as soon as possible and the Government is bound to take each and every measure to expedite the construction of protection wall. There shall be no compromise on the quality of work. The respondents are bound to provide fund and the construction work essentially to be completed within the stipulated period. As far question of compensation is concerned, no doubt the subject of the State deserves compensation and rehabilitation by the State, in case if any loss, and destruction occur in consequence of flood etc. In this case while exercising the constitutional jurisdiction it is impracticable for us to that how much loss was sustained by the petitioner and determine the inhabitants of area. Therefore, petitioner is at liberty to file suit for the redressal of his grievance in the Court of competent jurisdiction if so advised.
8. ' Petition stands disposed of in above terms.