QALANDAR ALI KHAN, J.--- This writ petition has been filed by Usman Ali Khan and 15 other petitioners, all practicing/getting training in District Bar Abbottabad, for the following declaration; "I. The petitioners/entire batch of session 2013 who has successfully completed their courses, have qualified their LL.B. examination and have undergone comprehensive training with their seniors under rule 35 of the KPK Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Rules, 2010, are entitled to be enrolled as advocates of subordinate Courts from the date of their actual commencement of training which has been furnished by their seniors on form "B" according to the verdict of W.P.No,2525/2014 decided on 25.09.2014 by this honourable Court.
II. That necessary directions may please be passed to the respondent Bar Council to amend the record in case of seniority/enrolment of the petitioners/entire batch of petitioners accordingly.
III. That the seniority of the petitioners/batch of the petitioners be pleased directed to be reckoned from the date of their actual commencement of training as furnished by them through their seniors on from B."
2. It has been averred in the writ petition that the petitioners were law-graduates from the University of Peshawar, 2013 (exams concludes in the first week of May, 2014 and result declared in August, 2014.) and started working in Courts after completion of their courses (some got their license to practice while others were still waiting for their interview to be admitted as advocates under Chapter V of the KPK Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Rules, 2010). The petitioners pointed out that Pakistan Bar Council changed criteria for admission as advocates during Session 2013 and introduced the requirement of passing NTS examination after announcement of final result of LL.B. so as to become entitled for six months internship period, thus a total of more than one year was required. (If otherwise the enrolments exams were conducted timely) to be admitted as an advocate to the subordinate Courts. They claimed that they ,tried to send their first intimation forms along with their other batch fellows of Session 2013 to the respondent/authority after starting of their training in May/June, 2014 but their intimation forms were not entertained owing to the above mentioned condition of NTS qualification. They further claimed that they along with other Batch Fellows applied for NTS test which was conducted on 28.09.2014 resulting in wastage of about five months, whereas they had joined under the relevant provisions of KPK Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Rules, 2010 in May/June, 2014. Meanwhile, law graduates of the same session from Peshawar Region challenged the requirement of NTS through W.P No,2525 of 2014 before the principal seat of this Court, which was partially accepted vide judgment/order dated 25.09.2014, and vide interim order in the said writ petition dated 05.03.2014, the petitioners in the writ petition were allowed to join the apprentice and the respondents were directed to provisionally entertain their intimation forms. The writ petition resulted in a clear verdict of this Court to the effect that NTS procedure was not applicable to the Session 2013; therefore, the entire batch of the law graduates shoes have been generally compensated but the respondent/authorities, according to the petitioners, did not do so resulting in wastage of valuable time of the petitioners/entire batch. The petitioners complained that they lost the opportunity to compete for the post of Assistant Public Prosecutors in Home and Tribal Affairs Department for want of possessing Bar Council license from 31.01.2015 and that they apprehend loss of such opportunities in the future as well for the same reason; hence the instant writ petition.
3. In their comments, the Khyber Pukhtunkhwa Bar Council: respondents raised several legal and factual objections. They, however, pointed out that though NTS had been duly condoned to all the applicants including the petitioners but condonation of time was totally outside the scope of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. It was further pointed out by them that at the relevant time NTS was in the field thus no senior was in a position to take any of the petitioners as pupil. The anomaly was, however, cleared after the decision of W.P No,2525/2014 decided on 25.09.2014. The respondents also annexed annexure 'AA' with their comments, showing dates of first intimation, deposit of fee for first intimation, second intimation by the petitioners and issuing of license to them.
4. Arguments of Mr. Naz Elahi Mughal, Advocate on behalf of the petitioners, Syed Amjad Shah, Advocate for respondents heard, and record perused with their valuable assistance.
5. In essence, the grievance of the petitioners relates to their non-enrolment as advocates of subordinate Courts from the date of actual commencement of their training as furnished by their seniors on form-B. In this connection, they seek support form the judgment of this Court dated 25.09.2014 in W.P No,2525/2014. However, the operative part o the judgment of this Court dated 25.09.2014 would show that on the partial acceptance of the writ petition, the notification dated 07.03.2013 of the Pakistan Bar Council was declared not applicable retrospectively to the petitioners as well as the entire batch of the students of the same session. The curriculum provided by the NTS was also declared to be not in accordance with rule 108(C)(5) of Pakistan Bar Council Rules, 1976, In the same judgment, a reference was made to interim order in the said W.P dated 05.8.2014 whereby the petitioners, in the writ petition were allowed to join the apprenticeship and the respondents were directed to provisionally entertain their intimation forms. Therefore, the respondents were directed to proceed with the previous procedure for their enrolment as 'advocates. In other words, though the first part of declaration with respect to notification dated 07.03.2013 of the Pakistan Bar Council an,; the curriculum provided by the NTS were made applicable to the entire batch of the students of the same session, yet the second part of the judgment with reference to interim order in the Writ Petition dated 05.08.2014 was reserved only for the petitioners in W.P No,2525 of 2014, who were allowed to join the apprenticeship and the respondents were directed to provisionally entertain their intimation forms; which is not the case here, as, according to the petitioners, their first, intimation forms were not entertained by the respondents, while according to the respondents, the first intimation forms along with fee for first intimation were first received on the dates mentioned in annexure 'AA' against each of the petitioners. The petitioners, on the other hand, could not show submission of their first intimation forms along with fee for first intimation earlier than the dates mentioned against their names.
Needless to say that submission of first intimation forms along with deposit of fee for first intimation is indispensable first step for issuance of license, which can neither be abridged nor enlarged, save with a direction/order of the Court, which was issued only in favour of the petitioners in W.P No,2525 of 2014, and the petitioners in the instant writ petition, being not petitioners in the said writ petition, cannot benefit from the interim order, leading to joining of apprenticeship by the petitioners and provisional acceptance of their intimation forms by the respondents in compliance with the direction contained in the interim order of the Court dated 05.08.2014.
6. Syed Amjad Shah, Advocate, stated at the bar that it was indeed a hardship case but Bar Council was helpless in the presence of explicit rules regarding first intimation and deposit of fee of first intimation as an essential pre-requisite for enrolment as advocates of subordinate Courts; B and we share his concern for the young law graduates but at the same time we also feel not persuaded to accede to the prayer of the petitioners in this regard in their writ petition for the reasons stated above. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.