MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, C.J---- The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Article 86(2) of Gilgit-Baltistan Order , 2018, wherein it is prayed that "this Court may set aside the operation and further proceedings of impugned Letter No.NAB/CV/4688/18/GB/1606 dated 14th September , 2018, impugned Letter No.NAB/CV/4688/18/GB / 1742 dated 8th October 2018 and impugned Letter No.NAB/CV / 4688/18/GB/1929 dated 23rd October 2018 issued by Respondents Nos.2 and 3 and all subsequent hidden proceedings and investigation on part of respondents against the petitioner , declaring it to be illegal, mala fide, being against law and rule, and also against the fundamental rights of the petitioner".
2. The petitioner is serving as Chief Engin eer in Works Department Gilgit-Baltistan. The Assistant Director (Coord)
National Accountability Bureau (NAB ) (R) Sub Office Gilgit (Respondent No.3) addressed the impugned letters to Secretary Works, Gilgit-Baltistan and Deputy Commissioner Gilgit for provision of information regarding the petitioner to verify complaints which are pending before NAB . The petitioner having apprehension of initiation of the inquires, has approached this Court for setting aside the operation and further proceedings of impugned letters issued by Respondent No.3.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the petitioner due to nefarious and baseless complaints submitted by the ill wishers of the petitioner before the NAB, is facing inquiries since 2006 and he has been subjected to mental agony and torture and financial loss. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the year 2007, a contractor namely Lal Johar submitted complaint No.619/07 against the petitioner before NAB and the NAB authorities after thorough investigation held that after discussion at appropriate level, the complaint was not approved for further process. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that another case was also sent by the Chief Secretary Gilgit-Baltistan to NAB for inquiry into the alleged non-completion, delay and over payments in respect of four development projects, but the NAB exonerated the petitioner being innocent. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has provided all information regarding his assets, money trails regarding his properties and constructed houses, but the respondents time and again initiate a new baseless inquiry just to torture the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that this Hon'ble Court in its judgment dated 24.05.2017 has also held that there is some underground unearthed forces are behind the inquiries of the petitioner and all the inquiries initiated against the petitioner were struck down throughout with direction to respondents to promote the petitioner from the date of his holding of the post of Chief Engineer BPS-20 with all back benefits. The learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that despite the judgment of this Hon'ble Court, the respondents again issued the impugned letters, which is sheer violation of judgment of this august Court. The learned counsel lastly submitted that the action of respondents is based on mala fide intention, against law and rules and also against the fundamental rights of the petitioner and liable to be declared to be null and void.
4. On the other hand, the Special Prosecutor for NAB, Assistant Advocate General assisted by Legal Advisor appearing on behalf of respondents oppo sed this writ petition by contending that it is the responsibility of NAB to crush corruption and corrupt practices from the country indiscriminately . The learned Special Prosecutor and Assistant Advocate General further argued that NAB is competent to get information for verification of complaints from any department and the departments are bound to provide the requisite information to the Bureau. They further submitted that previous inquiries have no concern with the present inquiries. The current matter is related to the assets beyond known sources of income of petitioner . Even otherwise NAB has prerogative powers and duty bound to inquire and investigate the complaints received against holder of public office. Impartiality and fairness of NAB is evident from the previous complaints against the petitioner . The learned Special Prosecutor submitted that this Hon'ble Court has not restrained NAB to proceed against the petitioner and the judgment was concerned with the previous inquiries and promotion of the petitioner . They relied on case laws 2013 PCr.LJ 974 [Peshawar], 2018 MLD 1326 [Peshawar], PLD 1971 Supreme Court 677, 2019 MLD 1469 [Peshawar (Mingora Bench)] and 2003 YLR 701 [Supreme Court (AJ&K)].
5. Pro and contra arguments heard and perused the available record of the case.
6. Perusal of record and the three impugned letters issued by Respondent No.3 reveals that the said respondent has requested to Secretary Works Gilgit-Baltistan and the Deputy Commissio ner Gilgit to provide complete personal and asset details of the petitioner under Section 27 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (NAO).
The information is just required to verify complaints submitted against the petitioner before the Bureau, whereas the petitioner is not called in person to investigate the matter . Under section 27 of NAO, the competent authority of NAB has exclusive right to seek assistance and information from any department. Section 27 of NAO is reproduced as under: "27. Power to seek assistance : The Chairman NAB or an officer of the NAB duly authorized by him, shall have the power to seek full and complete assistance and call for all or any documents and information relevant to or in connection with any matter or inquiry or investigation pending before the NAB, or disposal of any property surrendered to or seized by the NAB, from any department of the Federal Government, Provincial Government, local authority , bank, financial institution, person or any authority and institution or department in the public sector or the private sector as he may deem it fit and proper to demand or require, provided that in any case in which a question of secrecy is involved or is raised at any time, the Chairman NAB's decision shall be final."
7. Every department/institution has its own domain of jurisdiction to exercise its vested powers under the Constitution or through any special law and interference to limit the powers of any department/institution may create legal complications and may arise a situation of embarrassment for all. The NAB under Section 27 of NAO is competent to get detailed information about the petitioner , which is not illegal and beyond his vested powers. The petitioner has already been exonerated from complaints by verifying in a fair and transparent manner . In the present matter , if the petitioner is immaculate and innocent, he will surely emerge victorious again. The reference of learned counsel for the petitioner regarding previous judgment of this Court dated 24.05.2017 is not relevant to the present case, since the judgment was related to promotion of the petitioner to the post of Chief Engineer BS-20, which was implemented by the concerned quarters and the observations made therein were limited only upto disposal of that writ petition.
8. In the circumstances stated herein above, we are of the considered view that the instant writ petition is devoid of any merit, and the same is hereby dismissed.
9. Writ Petition No.194/2019 along with Civil Miscellaneous No.380/2019 is disposed-of f accordingly . File.