' SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, J.---During the course of hearing of the main case, interim order dated 14-7-2011 passed on behalf of the Wafqi Mohtasib was referred to by the counsel for the petitioner whereby interim relief had been granted to the petitioner. At this stage, counsel for respondent SNGPL pointed out that the office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib was lying vacant since October, 2010, hence, no order could have been passed by the said office and, therefore, order dated 14-7-2011 issued under the name and style of Wafaqi Mohtasib by one Brig. (R) Shamshad Ali, Consultant, was without lawful authority. .2. Notices were issued to the Wafaqi Mohtasib, Ombudsman Secretariat and Amjad Ali. Khan, Secretary, Mazhar Ali Khan, Additional Secretary and Brig. (R) Shamshad Ali, Consultant are present before the Court today.
3. Learned Deputy Attorney General along with the above officers submits that under Article 19 of the Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983 ("Order, 1983"), the Mohtasib has delegated certain judicial powers to its officers and it is in pursuance of the said delegation that the interim orders are being passed. They also relied on Article 10(11) of Order, 1983 in support of this contention and referred to letter dated 16-1-2002 bearing No, Consultant/Comp/WMS/2001 titled Detection Bills which has been published in the Handbook for Investigating Officers, Volume-II issued by the office of the Ombudsman, Islamabad to submit that the power to issue interim orders, especially regarding detection bills have been delegated to the said officers.
4. Perusal of Order, 1983 reveals that the appointment of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) is to diagnose, investigate, redress and rectify any injustice done to a person through maladministration. Article 3(3) provides that Mohtasib shall perform his functions and exercise his powers fairly, honestly, diligently and independently of the Executive, and all executive authorities throughout Pakistan shall act in aid of the Mohtasib. Article 7 provides that at any time when the office of Mohtasib is vacant, or the Mohtasib is absent or is unable to perform his functions due to any cause, the President shall appoint an Acting Mohtasib. Article 9 while discussing jurisdiction, functions and powers of the Mohtasib provides that the Mohtasib has the power to undertake any investigation into any allegation of maladministration on the part of any Agency or any of its officers or employees. Under Article 10(5) the Mohtasib is free to adopt any procedure as he considers appropriate for investigation and he may obtain information from any person. Sub-- Article (11) of Article 10 provides that Mohtasib shall regulate the procedure for the conduct of business or the exercise of powers under this Order. Article 11 provides that after investigation if the Mohtasib is of the opinion that the matter considered amounts to maladministration, he shall communicate his findings to the Agency concerned. If the Agency concerned does not comply with the recommendations of the Mohtasib or does not give reasons to the satisfaction of the Mohtasib for non-compliance, it shall be treated as "Defiance of Recommendations" and shall be dealt with accordingly. Article 13 once again provides that after inspection or investigation Mohtasib is satisfied he may refer the case to the concerned authorities for appropriate corrective or disciplinary action. Article 14(1) provides that the Mohtasib shall have the same powers as are vested in Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:--
(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;
(b) compelling the production of documents;
(c) receiving evidence on affidavits; and
(d) issuing commission for the examination of witnesses.
' Sub-Article (3) of Article 14 provides that the powers under Article 14(1) may be exercised by the Mohtasib or any person authorized in writing by the Mohtasib in this behalf while carrying out an 'inspection or investigation under the provisions of this Order. This clearly shows that the Mohtasib can only delegate powers provided under Article 14(1) to any officer for the specific purpose of inspection or investigation. Article 15(1) reconfirms this and provides that officers authorized for the purpose of making any inspection or investigation, may enter any premises when they have reason to believe that any article, book of accounts, or any other document relating to the subject- matter of inspection or investigation may be found. Article 16 provides that the Mohtasib shall have the same powers, as the Supreme Court of Pakistan to punish any person for contempt. Articles 17 and 18 provide that the Mohtasib may constitute an Inspection Team or Standing Committee or Advisory Committee for the functions as may be assigned to them, and every recommendation of such Inspection Team, Committee shall first be submitted to the Mohtasib for appropriate action, hence the decision has to be taken by the Mohtasib and Mohtasib alone. Article 19 provides for a specific power of delegation to any member of the staff , Standing or Advisory Committee, however, it is clarified that every report of such Member or Committee shall be submitted to the Mohtasib for appropriate action. Article 20 provides the appointment of Advisers to assist the Mohtasib in the discharge of his duties. Article 23 provides that the Mohtasib may seek the assistance of any person or authority for the performance of his functions. Finally, Article 33 provides for informal resolution of disputes, where any member of the Staff has been authorized to informally conciliate, amicably resolve, stipulate, settle or ameliorate any grievance without written memorandum and without the necessity of docketing any complaint or issuing any official notice.
5. The above provisions show that at no time the quasi-judicial power of the Mohtasib to decide a matter has been delegated to any of the staff or any of the Committee Members. The staff or the Committee Members, at best, assist the Mohtasib in performing his functions. This assistance may entail carrying out field inspections and investigations to a limited extent provided in Article 14(1) of the Order and no more.
6. Reference to letter dated 16-1-2002 relating to detection bills published at page 433 of the Hand Book for Investigating -Officer (Volume-II) issued by the office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib, the said letter does not advance the case of the staff/Consultant of the Wafaqi Mohtasib. The said letter does not delegate the powers of the Mohtasib to the respondent staff, so that they can issue orders on behalf of the Wafaqi Mohtasib. The said letter has been issued under Article 10(11) of the Order and it simply facilitates the working of the Wafaqi Mohtasib in matters of granting interim relief (by the Mohtasib) in the case of detection bills. It cannot be extended to mean that the procedure laid down for the benefit of the Wafaqi Mohtasib is automatically extended to authorize the staff of Wafaqi Mohtasib to issue the said orders. No other letter or notification has been referred to by the officers of the Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat to show that the judicial function has been delegated to them. Provisions of Order, 1983, as discussed above, are clear that delegation of the essential function of adjudication has not been permitted, therefore, interim order dated 14-7-2011 issued by Brig. (R.) Shamshad Ali, Consultant is absolutely without lawful authority and void ab initio.
7. I, therefore, direct Secretary Wafaqi Mohtasib to hold a detailed inquiry into the matter and to initiate departmental action against the officers/consultants, who have violated the law by passing interim orders on behalf of the Wafaqi Mohtasib, and submit a detailed report to this court within a period of three months from today clearly showing the actions taken against the said officers. The Secretary of the Wafaqi Mohtasib is also directed to ensure that no judicial order/interim order is issued in future by the staff/officers/consultants working at the Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat. As far as the main case of the petitioner is concerned, let it come up for hearing on 15-11-2011.
8. This order is approved for reporting.