' MRS. ASHRAF JAHAN, J.--- The Petitions bearing Nos. D-103 of 2011, D-224 of 2011 and D-9 of 2011 were dismissed vide short order dated 10-10-2013.
2. By this single order, reasons are detailed/assigned in all the three petitions as the controversies arise out of similar facts and involve identical questions of law.
3. Upon examination of Petitions it appears that the petitioners, who are the members of ex- Servicemen Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. (hereafter referred to as 'Society') have filed these petitions against the Society, its Registrar, Province of Sindh through Chairman Sindh Cooperative Housing Authority, Chairman Anti-Corruption Sindh as well as some other private respondents, said to be the office-bearers of earlier management of the society in capacity of Honorary Secretary, Chairman or Members of Managing Committee. The petitioners have levelled serious allegations in respect of misappropriation of society funds and properties etc. Against the private respondents and have prayed that official respondents may be ordered to take action against them under the provisions of Pakistan Penal Code for recovery of embezzled/misappropriated public funds and the properties owned by the Society.
4. The respondents were served, the respondent Muhammad Naseem has filed his counter- affidavit wherein he has vehemently denied the allegations levelled in the above petitions and challenged their maintainability. Whereas the Administrator on behalf of the Society in his comments dated 8-7-2011 has supported the case of petitioners and stated that the prayers in the petitions are made in the best public interest as the public funds and properties of the Society have been looted by the private respondents. The department of Anti-Corruption has filed parawise comments in C.P. No, D-9 of 2011, whereby they have acknowledged the receipt of complaint in respect of alleged misappropriation and have disclosed that enquiry is in progress.
However, at the same time they have also stated that petitions against them are not maintainable for the sole reason that petitioners have not claimed any relief against them.
5. During proceedings the petitioners have appeared in person and argued their cases. They have submitted that the private respondents named in these petitions had encroached the Government land from Naclass Nos.85 and 91 of Deh Khanto Tappo Landhi Karachi in the year 1983 and thereafter they remained office-bearers of the respondent-Society during different periods commencing from 1990 onwards and had misappropriated public funds and the properties owned by the Society. It is alleged that above respondents illegally and in mala fide manner allotted hundreds of plots to their relatives and friends. In this regard from time to time complaints were made to the Anti-Corruption Establishment Karachi, Registrar, Cooperative Housing Society and Ombudsmen etc. But without any response. Now the management of the Society has changed, but so far no action has been taken against these culprits. It is vehemently urged by the petitioners that appropriate action under the law may be taken against the private respondents and such misappropriated amount properties may be recovered from them.
6. We have considered the submissions made before us and perused the case record. The perusal of record reveals that there is a chequered history of litigation between the parties before various forums up to the level of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, including High Court, Civil Courts, Anti- Corruption Court and Ombudsmen etc. And now by way of filing the present petitions under Article 199 of the Constitution the petitioners have agitated their grievances and prayed for the recovery of alleged misappropriated amount and properties from the private respondents.
7. While deciding these petitions first of all it is to be seen as to whether under the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution any factual controversy requiring evidence can be examined and decided by this Court.
8. The contents of present petitions reveal that the controversies raised between the parties are decades old. The record shows that litigation before different forums i,e, civil and criminal had been pending or still pending with regard to the allegations levelled against the private respondents.
These disputes generally revolve around the fake allocation plots, non-holding of society Elections, misappropriation of Society funds and properties from time to time.
9. The petitioners have submitted that respondent No,1 namely Muhammad Nasim, had filed a false C.P. No, D-589 of 2008 and after getting the stay order in above Constitution Petition misappropriated the public funds but eventually above Constitution Petition was dismissed vide order dated 26-6-2010. They have also referred to the show-cause notice dated 16-2-2010 issued to the ex-Chairman/Members of the Managing Committee of the respondent-Society by the Secretary, Government of Sindh/Chairman Sindh Cooperative Housing Authority. They have also drawn the attention of this Court towards Reference No,20 of 2006 pending before Accountability Court No,V Karachi against respondents namely Ahmed Yar Malik and Fazalur Rehman on the charges of misappropriation of Society funds and fraudulent allotments of Government Land.
10. The pendency of multiple litigation before different forums is admitted by the respondents, but the petitioners are unable to show the final outcome of such litigations or the present status of the above litigations. However they have informed that some enquiry is also pending before the Anti- Corruption authorities.
11. Looking to the previous history of litigation and nature of allegations it appears that disputed questions of facts are involved in these petitions. The petitioners have also disclosed certain figures/ amount in respect of alleged misappropriation of funds, but under these circumstances it is to be seen whether this court while sitting in its constitutional jurisdiction can investigate into these factual controversies involved in the matter. It is well-established legal position that High Court in exercise of such jurisdiction cannot ordinarily embark upon an exercise .To determine intricate, contested and complicated questions of fact. Resolution of such factual disputes has to take place through ordinary legal process. This extraordinary jurisdiction is primarily meant for providing expeditious remedy in a case when the illegality of the impugned action of an executive or other authority can be established without any elaborate enquiry into complicated or disputed facts. Whereas the facts of these petitions reveal that to probe into serious allegations of alleged misappropriation of millions of rupees and plots detailed investigation/evidence would be required, which cannot be undertaken while sitting in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction.
Therefore we are of the considered view that the contention made in present petitions require detailed factual enquiry which cannot be ventured upon in Constitutional jurisdiction. The proper remedy for the petitioners would be to pursue the pending litigation or to approach the appropriate courts for redressal of their grievances. With these observations the present petitions are hereby dismissed as not maintainable under the law.
12. These are the reasons for the short order dated 10-10-2013.