' SHAH KHAWAR, J. --- The instant writ petition has been filed on behalf of M/s. Farzand Circus with its head office Beldave Mansion Royal Park, Lahore. One Muhammad Tahir Javed Manager on behalf of M/s Farzand Circus applied for permission of holding of Circus and shows before District Coordination Officer, Chiniot/respondent No, 1 at the event of mela/urs of Sakhi Abdul Wahab to be celebrated on Jhang Road Chiniot w,e,f, 10.07.2014 to 15.07.2014.
2. The application for grant of permission made to respondent No, 1 was referred to District Police Officer. Chiniot/respondent No, 2, who sought report from the local Police. The local Police after making report in favour of the petitioner sent the same to the office of respondents No, 2 for onward submission to respondent No,
1. Respondent No, 2/DPO Chiniot forwarded the report of local Police to the office of DCO Chiniot vide letter dated 01.07.2014, but same was not agreed upon and was rejected by the DCO Chiniot vide order dated 04.07.2014.
3. A summary dated 03.07.2014 was moved by Personal Assistant (P.A) to respondent No, 1, in which it was mentioned that upon the application of Muhammad Tahir Javed, Manager Fazand Circus, a report was requisitioned from the DPO concerned which was so filed, in which he expressed his no objection in the holding of said event. In para No, 2 of the said summary, the P.A. To DCO at his own motion, pointed out that Police report is silent about the holy month of Ramzan and high level of security risk in the country and this aspect of the matter may be considered while deciding the, petition made by the petitioner. The said noting' was referred to DOC P1. In para No, 5 of the noting, District Officer Coordination (DOC) noted that in addition to the deteriorating law and order situation, the sanctity of the month of Ramzan is to be observed and such permission could be objectionable to the public at large and finally recommended that the said application may be considered after the month of Ramzan. Respondent No, 1 in para No, 6 of the summary, approved para No, 5 as suggested by DOC and the case was filed.
4. From perusal of the above-sad noting, it reflects that respondent No, 1/District Coordination Officer has not even bothered to give his own opinion on this issue and relied upon the recommendations made by his P.A.
5. The above-mentioned casual attitude of respondent No, 1 reflects that he does not apply his own mind in his day to day business and relies upon the suggestions and recommendations made by his P.A. This is amazing that rather than placing the report to the DCO forwarded by the DPO, Chiniot, Personal Assistant of respondent No, 1 deemed it proper to offer his own ideas while negating the recommendations of the DPO. This whole exercise is in flagrant violation of the concept of good governance. While deciding this matter, respondent No, 1 did not perform his Constitutional obligations and also did not take into consideration that carrying out any lawful business and trade is the fundamental right of an individual under Article 18 as guaranteed by the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Reference could be made of the case-law reported as Shaukat Ali v. Government of Pakistan, etc. (PLD 1997 SC 342). It is held that State functionaries are expected to act fairly and justly in a manner which should not give to any one any cause of complaint on account of discriminatory treatment or otherwise. While discharging official functions, efforts should be made by State functionaries to ensure that no one is denied the right to earn his livelihood because of the unfair or discriminatory act on their part.
6. Under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the High Courts are the custodian of the fundamental rights of its citizens. Denial of any of the fundamental rights of the citizens could not be allowed due to fanciful and arbitrary ideas and presumptions of the State functionaries like respondent No,
1. In the same manner, according to Article 9 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, protection of life to the citizens has been declared as an inviolable Constitutional obligation of the State. No such action of the Executive could prevail which may deny any of the fundamental rights of individuals on the pretext that same may cause security problems and law and order situation. If this notion of respondent No 1 is accepted then people must stay at home and should not carry out any activity in the wake of terrorism and Military action in Wazirastan.
7. The summary/noting dated 03.07.2014 initiated by Personal Assistant to the District Coordination Officer, Chiniot and finally approved by respondent No, 1 is not tenable in the eyes of law, which is hereby set aside.
8. By allowing the instant writ petition. District Officer Coordination/respondent No, 1 is directed to facilitate the petitioner in holding Circus shows according to the schedule mentioned in the writ petition. Respondent No, 1 is also directed to convene a meeting with the petitioner as well as respondent No, 2/District Police Officer, Chiniot to provide appropriate security measures for holding of Circus shows as proposed by the petitioner. In the same manner, the petitioner is also directed to cooperate with respondents No, 1 & 2 in finalizing modalities of security and to make sure that during the event, sanctity of the month of holy Ramzan is strictly observed. The learned AAG, Punjab who is present in the Court is directed to communicate this order to respondents No, 1 & 2 to implement the same.
9. With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition is allowed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.