Through this writ petition filed under Sections 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, an order passed by the District Magistrate, Muzaffarabad dated 06.06.2012 ' has been challenged for having been passed without lawful authority. A prohibition has also been sought against the Respondents No. 2 & 3 not to cancel the registration or seal the Central Asia Institute, Hostel.
2. Precise facts, forming background of the instant petition, as per the claim of the petitioners are that Petitioner No. 2, being program Director, is heading and running a non-Governmental Organization namely; Central Asia Institute. It is claimed that the Central Asia Institute is a non- profit, NGO, working to empower the communities of Central Asia through literacy and education, especially for female. It is stated that at present, launching different projects of teachers/School support program, construction of educational buildings, the petitioner is heading a girls hostel, in Gojra, Tehsil & District Muzaffarabad. It is claimed that the petitioner applied to Respondent No. 1 for NOC for establishment of hostel on. 28.11.2011, which was kept pending and lastly on 13.3.2012 a letter was written for issuance of the NOC after necessary investigation. It is alleged that the investigation authorities, for unknown and maid fide reasons, submitted their reports contrary to the facts and ground realities, whereupon, the Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 6.6.2012 issued another letter to Respondent No. 2 to seal the hostel. It is further alleged that another letter has also been written from Respondent No. 1 to Respondent No. 3 for cancellation of registration of the NGO. The supra noted letter issued by Respondent No. 1 on 06.06.2012 is the subject matter of the instant writ petition.
3. The petition was contested by the Respondents by filing written statement, wherein, they have refuted almost all the claims of the petitioners and it is stated that all the proceedings are being conducted in pursuance of the complaints of the public at large and investigations made, thereafter. It is also stated that the respondents have no objection to the extent of the purpose of support of education at any level but the dispute is about establishment of Girls Hostel. Petitioner- Trust, applied for NOC and started the Hostel without waiting for issuance of the same, which action was illegal.
4. Syed Mushtaq Hussain Gillani, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia argued that the petitioner-Trust is a nonprofit non-Governmental Organization, which aims at the education for girls and in this way the Trust has supported in construction of several school buildings and for the purpose of providing residential facilities, the Trust has established a girls hostel at Gojra, Muzaffarabad. The learned counsel maintained that in this regard, the Trust has been registered by the District Council Muzaffarabad. The learned counsel alleged that the petitioner-Trust applied for NOC but the respondents on the pretext of some unknown complaints, with mala fide reasons are bent upon to cancel the registration of the hostel and seal it. The learned counsel further alleged that the respondents have no authority to create hurdles in the way of the charity work, which aims at the literacy of the female community. Finally, the learned counsel craved for issuance of writ against the respondents, restraining them from cancellation of the registration of the petitioner-trust.
5. Sardar M.R Khan, the learned A.A.G., on the other hand, forcefully negated the version of the petitioners and argued that the petitioners have established a girls' hostel without prior permission of the concerned authorities. The learned A.A.G. contended that accommodation of girls is a very sensitive issue but the petitioners did not bother to obtain NOC prior to the establishment of the same. It was also alleged by the learned A.A.G. that there were several complaints of the locals of the area, whereupon investigations were held and in light of the investigation reports, all the proceeding. were conducted and order has been passed. The learned A.A.G. alleged that the petitioners have not challenged the reports of the authorities, whereupon cancellation of; registration of the Trust is in process, therefore, the instant writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this sole ground. The learned A.A.G. further alleged that the District Council was not authorized to register a girls' hostel, therefore, the registration is a nullity in the eye of law. The A.A.G. also contended that the petitioner-trust has an alternate, adequate and efficacious remedy in shape of revision before the Competent Court and in presence of alternate remedy, no writ can be issued.
Finally, the learned A.A.G., prayed for dismissal of the petition with exemplary costs.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, scanned the record made available with the file, considered the law on the point and have given due thought to the controversy in hand.
7. Prior to discussing the merits, of the case, I would like to observe that the reports of the investigating authorities, on the basis of which the impugned letter dated 06.06.2012 has been issued, have not been challenged by the petitioner.
8. It is also pertinent to mention here that the petitioners have an alternate remedy in shape of revision against the impugned order before the competent Court, but instead of availing the same the petitioner-trust has invoked the extra ordinary-jurisdiction of this Court, which was not warranted. The impugned letter/order issued by Respondent No. 1 seems to be an order under Section 144 of the Cr. PC, which is revisable by the competent Court.
9. So far, as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner-trust that the impugned action has been taken on unknown complaints, which have not been proved through evidence is concerned, which is also a question of fact and can only be resolved by recording the evidence before the concerned authority/forum and this Court is not inclined to do the same, while exercising constitutional jurisdiction.
10.So far as the question of registration of the petitioner-trust is concerned, I have perused the record and failed to dig out the permission of establishment of girls' hostel. Upon the perusal of the Registration Certificate issued by Respondent No. 3, it transpires that this registration certificate has been issued under Local Government Act, 1990. The perusal of all items of the 4th schedule, relating to functions of District Council to the said Act, it is found that the Respondent No. 3 is not empowered to register or issue registration certificate regarding the registration of such hostels.
Whereas, under item 32 & 34, the District Council can perform functions of construction and maintenance of buildings to be used as hostels for students and can also arrange programs for training of teachers. Hence, mere mention of word `HOSTAL' and not the 'Hostel', in the said registration certificate by Respondent No. 3 (Arm `D'), is of no legal value. However, permission by the Education Secretariat dated 15.05.2012 to the extent of teacher/school support program is available on the file as Anx. 'C', which, in my estimation, can be made in many other, modes apart from running a girls' hostel as it is evident from the said NOC.
11.It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner claims to be an NGO, working, internationally. The Trust-Deed annexed with the writ petition as Anx. 'A' titled 'Trust-deed of Central Asia Institute' has been registered by Sub-Registrar, Rawalpindi on 27.11.20.10 by one; Mr. Ilyas Ahmed Mirza and Mrs. Talat Ilyas, residents of Bannu (Pakistan), having office at DHA, Rawalpindi. It is expedient to note that in the interpretation clause of this deed, Program Director is not defined/interpreted, whereas, name of the above mentioned trustees as party are missing in the writ petition, hence, the petition, prima-facie is not maintainable.
12.It is further noted that Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies/ NGOs like the petitioner are registered and controlled through an Ordinance of 1961, known as Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies (Registration and Control) Ordinance, 1961, which has been extended to Azad Jammu & Kashmir vide Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council Extension of Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies (Registration & Control) Act, 1982.
13.Upon a careful perusal of the above provisions of the Act, ibid as well as rules, made there- under, known as Rules, 1962, it transpires that registration of such like welfare agencies is mandatory with the Kashmir Council/Registration Authority.
14.Detailed scanning of the petition as well as documents, therewith, it is found that no such registration is available on the record, hence, claim of the petitioner is without any legal foundation, which merits no consideration through the instant writ petition.
15. Even otherwise, after having considered the other merits and facts of the case this Court is justified to hold that the petitioner, unfortunately could neither succeed to 'point out any illegality, irregularity or mala fide in the impugned letter nor could point out violation of any law or infringement of any constitutional right of the petitioner. Mere leveling an allegation of mala-fide does not create any reason for interference in the domain of the administrative authorities, therefore, the same warrants no interference by this Court in writ jurisdiction.
16.The nutshell of the above detailed discussion is that the instant writ petition, having no force in it, is hereby dismissed, with no order as to costs.
17.Order announced in the open Court. The file shall be a part of record after due completion.