MUHAMMAD FARRUKH IRFAN KHAN, J.----The Petitioners have tiled the instant writ petition with the following prayer: "In view of the submissions made above, it is most respectfully prayed that the writ petition may very kindly be accepted and the proceeding of tender scheduled to be held on 30.12.2017 may very kindly be declared illegal and unlawful and the same may very graciously be set-aside and resultantly the respondents Nos,3 and 4 may very kindly be directed to give development funds also to the wards of the petitioners.
Any other relief qua the disposal of this writ petition may also be awarded to the petitioner."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being chosen representatives of the people of their respective constituencies are entitled to get funds of their share from the package given by the Govt. of Punjab for development of their respective areas which have not been included in the impugned Tender; that prior to issuance of the Tender Notice the petitioners have not been consulted for identification of development schemes as required under Clause 3(a) of the Terms of Reference set by the Punjab Govt. for the Joint District Steering Committee of Nankana District; that the development works relating to the Wards of the petitioners have been selected on the asking of the non-elected political figures affiliated with the ruling party; that due to the act of the respondents most of the developments works of urgent nature have been ignored, which has resulted in increasing the difficulties of the voters of the wards of the petitioners; that as the Committee constituted by the competent authority has not complied with the Terms of Reference, therefore, its recommendations and in compliance thereof publication of Tender Notice being illegal is liable to be set at naught.
3. Conversely, learned counsel for respondents Nos,3 and 4 being Chairman and Chief Officer of Municipal Committee, Sheikhupura submits that the petitioners were asked to provide the list of development projects of their respective Wards but they failed to do so, even then development projects of their wards have also been included in the Tender Notice with estimated cost of Rs,0.500 million each; that the respondents have not committed any illegality or irregularity in issuance of the Tender Notice; that the process of selection of development projects has been completed in a fair and transparent manner and there is no element of nepotism or favouritism in allocating development funds; that the instant writ petition merits dismissal.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Admittedly, the joint provincial Steering Committee constituted by Government of the Punjab Local Government and Community Development Department through Notification No, SO.LPs(LG)4/4/2017, dated 3.11.2017 has been given the following Terms of Reference:
(a) To provide policy guidelines for implementation of Local Government Development Package and Khadim-e-Punjab Saaf Dehat Programme;
(b) To supervise and monitor the execution of both programs according to timelines;
(c) To ensure timely release of funds;
(d) To keep close liaison with all stakeholders and to resolve issues arising during execution of the programmes;
(e) Undertake periodic review meetings to oversee the progress of the targeted actions.
Keeping in view the terms of reference noted above and also the spirit behind the local bodies system, it is emphasized that the role of the elected representatives is of paramount importance.
Where an elected representative of a Ward is unable to submit a scheme for development work undertaken in his/her constituency, the Executing Authority should obtain NOC from him/her or have in possession any such other material from which it may be inferred that the concerned elected representative is not interested in utilizing the development funds allocated to his/her Ward/Constituency or is intentionally delaying the implementation of the development schemes in his/her Ward. In all fairness, it is the first and foremost right of the elected representative of the Ward to recommend the work of development nature in any particular part of his/her constituency, within the budget allocation and this right cannot be taken away in an arbitrary manner. Needless to say that in utilization of funds sufficient safeguards should be provided against conflict of interest.
In the report and parawise comments respondents Nos,3 and 4 have made the following assertions: "that the Chief Minister Punjab allocated Rs,1.74 Billion to 3587/MC wards @ Rs,0.500 million per ward vide CM Directive No, PA/A S(S&EM)/C MO/17/0T-471dated 02.11.2017 for development projects under Punjab Local Government Development Package; that consequently all the Councilors were asked to provide list of development projects of their respective wards; that the councilors submitted the development schemes of their entire wards except the petitioners due to unknown reasons; that the development schemes of the neglected areas of their wards were included in the larger public interest in the list as per directions of the Provincial Government; and that no funds have been allocated to the blue eyed persons as alleged in the writ petition."
6. The respondents have taken the stance that the petitioners failed to provide the list of their development schemes of their respective wards but this defence is not substantiated on record.
From the contents of the report and parawise comments submitted by respondents Nos,3 and 4 it is evident that prior to publication of the impugned Tender Notice the petitioners were never associated with the process of identification of development projects in their respective wards.
Admittedly, the petitioners are the elected representatives of their respective Union Councils of the Municipal Committee, Sheikhupura. They are the stakeholders with whom the Terms of Reference bind the Steering Committee to have close liaison, therefore, their participation in such schemes is essential and cannot be ignored without any valid justification.
7. The development projects included in the Tender Notice relating to the wards of the petitioners for carrying out development works do not have the due recommendations of the petitioners who are the elected representatives (Councilors) of their respective wards. Therefore, it is quite evident that the majority of the people who elected the petitioners as their representatives have been hoodwinked and denied the right to reap the fruit of their votes. Thus the elected Councilors of the wards and their majority voters have been deprived of their lawful right while carrying out development works in their respective wards. This act of the respondents amounts to negation of devolution plan which empowers the residents of a community to participate in the decision making of the Local Government system. The tendency of ignoring the elected representatives not affiliated with the ruling party is against the mandate of devolution, which is creating difficulties for the general public in reaping the benefits of democracy at grass root level. Non-associating the petitioners with the process of identification of the development works of their respective wards and selecting such development works of their wards, which are identified and recommended by the non-elected political figures either affiliated with the ruling party or who are able to use their personal influence is clearly an attempt to fail the elected councilors with mala fide intention in the next round of elections or in any other democratic process where right of adult franchise is to be exercised. This tendency is bound to undermine and frustrate the entire Local Government system and can also be termed as clear cut pre-poll rigging for the forthcoming National and Provincial Assembly Elections.
8. In view of the above discussion, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned Tender Notice dated 3.11.2017 insofar as relating to the development works of the wards of which the petitioners are the elected representatives is set-aside. The respondents will invite fresh tenders in respect of the development works of the Wards of the petitioners after' consultation and obtaining recommendations of the petitioners on the basis of the Terms of Reference above in its true spirit..