' MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, C J.--The Principal, Women Medical College, Abbottabad through instant Writ Petition No.542-A/2014 as well as the Chairman of Jinnah Medical College, Peshawar, and the Principals Al-Razi Medical College, Peshawar as well as Abbottabad International Medical College, Abbottabad through the connected Writ Petitions No.2258/2014, No.2259/2014 and No.543- A/2014 have challenged the letters dated 14.07.2014, 10.07.2014 and 01.07.2014 respectively, issued by the Deputy Director (Coord), National Accountability Bureau KPK, Peshawar for providing information under section 19 read with Section 27 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 with regard to inquiry against the officials of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council/ owners/ management of illegal Medical and Dental Colleges at Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and others, as acts and decisions taken in violation of the PMDC Ordinance, 1962 as amended by PMDC (Amendment)
Act, 2012 and have prayed for declaring the same as illegal, unlawful, void ab initio and amounting to harassm ent. As common questions of law and facts are involved in all the writ petitions, therefore, we propose to dispose of the same through this single judgment in Writ Petition No.542- A/2014.
2. The crux of the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners was that the petitioners' colleges have been duly recognized by the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (hereinafter called PM&DC), which have been further notified by the Federal Government as per provisions of the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council Ordinance, 1962 (hereinafter called the Ordinance). The Medical and Dental Colleges, according to the learned counsel, are regulated for the purpose of uniform standards and all other technical matters by the PM&DC, which is the apex body as well as regulatory authority of the Medical and Dental Profession as well as Medical Institutions, the recognition of which in all matters are governed by it under the Ordinance, now amended by the Pakistan Medical and Dental Colleges (Amendment) Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the Amending Act). Further contended that the process of recognition is a five-fold activity, which involves (i) scrutiny of the documents by the Federal Government at the initial stage, (ii) forwarding the same to the PM&DC if found in order, (iii) inspection of the premises by a team of expert inspectors, recommendation of the inspection team about the facilities, faculty and other relevant requirements to impart training to medical and dental students, (iv) submission of the said report of the Inspection Team to the Executive Committee of PMDC for consideration, making of final recommendations to the Federal Government and (v) issuance of notification of recognition to the College to announce admissions and start training. It was averred that all this lengthy process has already been carried out and thereafter the petitioners' colleges were recognized as per requirement of law applicable at the relevant time. The learned counsel referred to the judgment of this Court passed in W.P. No.434-A/2012 filed by some students of Northern Institute of Medical Science, Abbottabad, which was decided on 13.06.2013 wherein directions were issued to the NAB authorities to conduct an inquiry into the matter but the NIMS Medical College was neither recognized by the PM& DC nor the Federal Government and had admitted students, whereas the case of petitioners' colleges is quite different, in that, the petitioners' colleges are duly recognized under the procedure given in Section 35 of the Ordinance, now Section 38 of the Amending Act. The learned counsel, therefore, concluded that the apex Court has already determined the limits of NAB by interpreting Section 19 of the NAB Ordinance in Dr. Arsalan Iftikhar's case (PLD 2012 SC 903) and that in Section 36-A of the Ordinance, now Section 39 of the Amending Act, an over-riding effect has been given to the provisions of the Ordinance and the Act, thus, the provisions of the Act being a special law and latter in time shall have an overriding effect over the NAB Ordinance and legally the letters in question are without any jurisdiction, unlawful and liable to be set aside.
' As against that, the learned DPG argued that numerous complaints were received by the NAB wherein allegation of corruption and corrupt practices were leveled against the officials of PM&DC, owners/management of illegal medical and dental colleges in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, therefore, the competent authority took cognizance of the matter by initiating criminal proceedings and authorized inquiry under section 18(c) of the NAB Ordinance in order to determine the factual position, that is why, the impugned letters were issued in accordance with law; that the NAB intends to conduct inspection of the petitioners' Colleges to verify numerous complaints and to confirm their veracity, thus the apprehension of the management of the Colleges regarding inspection by NAB team comprising of medical experts is totally baseless. Further submitted that the role of NAB is only confined to unearth the corruption and corrupt practices committed by the PM&DC officials and owners of Colleges in accordance with law, as there is no violation of the PM&DC law, which is a regulatory body whereas the NAB being an apex anti-corruption agency has no concern and purpose in common. The learned DPG also stated that the NIMS Medical College is a separate case duly authorized by the competent authority under the law which has no relevance with the instant case and the petitioners' Colleges are required to provide all possible assistance to NAB as is done by all the statutory organizations/institutions.
4. The learned counsel for PM&DC supported the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and stated that the PM&DC is a regulatory body for regulating medical and dental profession, medical and dental education and institutions and the inspection of the Colleges in the private sector is the sole job of PM&DC. The learned counsel in support of his arguments placed reliance on the cases of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council v. Ziauddin Medical University (PLD 2007 SC 323) and H.M. Saya & Co. v. Wazir Ali Industries Limited (PLD 1969 Supreme Court 65), wherein the powers of the Council about asking for information, making queries, carrying out inspections, issuing directions and taking other steps have been enumerated.
5. Arguments of the learned counsel for the parties were heard and record of the case was perused.
6. The petitioners are aggrieved of the letters issued by the NAB authority under Section 19 read with section 27 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999, whereunder the Principals of the Colleges have been informed that the NAB is conducting the subject inquiry under the provisions of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999. In order to determine factual position the inspection team of this Bureau will conduct inspection of the colleges. Perusal of the record would reveal that in the case of Women Medical College, the Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Health vide letter dated 13.08.2007 duly approved the College in pursuance of Section 11 of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council Ordinance, 1962 (now Section 18 of the Amending Act, 2012) in consultation with Pakistan Medical and Dental Council, to impart training for MBBS degrees awarded by the University of Peshawar. The name of the College was also directed to be included in the First Schedule under the University of Peshawar. Similarly vide Gazette of Pakistan dated 18.03.2009 the Jinnah Medical College was also approved for such a training and awarding MBBS degrees under the University of Peshawar. The International Medical College, Abbottabad was recognized by the Ministry of National Regulations and Services, Government of Pakistan vide letter dated 12.10.2012 and such a notification in respect of Al-Razi Medical College, Peshawar was issued by the Ministry of Health, Government of Pakistan on 25th June, 2011. (Though certain litigation of the said Medical College was there because of certain anomalies and PMDC being the concerned authority had taken notice of that under the relevant law but ultimately a time frame was given by the apex Court to remove the same and the College will be dealt with accordingly),It is thus evident that the petitioners colleges have been duly recognized by the PMDC and the Federal Government within the meanings of Section 11(1)(2) and (3) of the Medical and Dental Council Ordinance, 1962. The PM&DC has also shown its concern over the action of NAB because such proceedings were initiated without taking the PMDC, the country's prime regulatory body of medical education, on board. It is also a fact that the PMDC envisages its role as an independent body under the PMDC Ordinance, 1962 and Medical and Dental Council (Amendment) Act, 2012, wherein there is no provision for a joint inspection of the Colleges. The council's regulations categorically state that inspection of the medical and dental institutions may be carried out by the inspectors appointed by the PMDC's executive committee and commissioned by the president of the council.
7. Perusal of the relevant provisions of the Ordinance/Act and Regulations of PM&DC reveals that a comprehensive multi layered approach has been laid down in the statutes. The council after deliberation makes its final recommendations to the Federal Government and thereafter the decision is left to the Federal Government to grant or decline the recognition and if the Federal Government so decides to grant recognition then the notification of recognition is issued to include the "name of the college in the relevant schedule of the PM&DC Ordinance by a notification in the official gazette and that concludes the process of the Medical and Dental institutions to announce admissions and start training, which they are not allowed before the recognition is granted.
Similarly, in case of any complaint, the. Federal Government has the power to inquire into the matter under Section 35(1) of the Medical and Dental Council Ordinance, 1962 (now Section 38 of the Amending Act).
8. In the case of Muhammad Irshad Khan v. Chairman, National Accountability Bureau (2007 PCr.LJ 1957) a learned Bench of the Karachi High Court observed as under:- "Thus, the consensus of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan from the year 1971 and onward is that the High Court has jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution and competent to correct such proceedings and pass necessary orders to ensure justice and fair play. The Investigating Authorities do not have the entire and total authority of running investigation according to their whims, therefore, if the investigation is launched malafldely or beyond the jurisdiction of investigating agency, then the same can be corrected and appropriate orders can be passed. "
' The august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Dr. Arsalan Iftikhar v. Malik Rim Hussain and others (PLD 2012 Supreme Court 903) has held that before summoning a person to attend, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) was duty bound to identify and particularize the information sought from any witness etc. And to state the nexus between such information and the subject of the inquiry being conducted by NAB. In the cases in hand, the notices issued to the petitioners are lacking on this particular aspect of the case also.
9. The averment of the learned DPG that the Council itself is involved in corrupt practices with the connivance of Colleges is not of much force so as to provide way for interference in the affairs of the PM&DC by the NAB by taking the role of PM&DC itself. If some officials of the PM&DC have committed some corrupt practices, the NAB can individually inquire into the same, which has no nexus with the cases in hand. Section 35 (now Section 38) of the PM&DC Ordinance provides that:- "Whenever it is made to appear to the Federal Government that the Council is not complying with any of the provisions of this Ordinance, the Federal Government may refer the particulars of the complaint to a Commission of Inquiry consisting of three persons, two of whom shall be appointed by the Federal Government, one being a Judge of a High Court, and one by the Council; and such Commission shall proceed to inquire in a summary manner and to report to the Federal Government as to the truth of the matters charged in the complaint, and in case of any charge of default or of improper action being found by the Commission to have been established, the Commission shall recommend the remedies, if any, which are in its opinion necessary."
' A look at the above provision cf law would make it clear that a proper mechanism has already been provided if the Council is not complying with the provisions of the Ordinance/Act. In the circumstances, when there is no complaint either from the Federal Government or the PM&DC about the petitioners' colleges, then how the NAB can supersede and take on the role and function of the PMDC to create an environment of fear and harassment at the medical institutions without pinpointing the nature of irregularities, whether it is a matter of academics, administration or finances, as the process of inspection is highly technical and the PMDC's qualified inspectors undertake it with great care. Under the law, it is the responsibility of the PMDC to inspect whether medical and dental institutions are fulfilling the requisite criteria mentioned in PMDC regulations of 2012. In the circumstances, the NAB's intervention in affairs of the institutions is quite surprising and not within its purview.
10. For the reasons stated above, all the writ petitions are accepted and the impugned letters issued to the Colleges Administration are set aside and the NAB authorities are refrained to interfere in the affairs of the PM&DC or the Colleges, which are duly recognized by the PM&DC as well as the Federal Government to impart training and award MBBS degrees to the students.