decided on 12th September, 1983.
(a)Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981)- --- Art, 9-Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), S. 12(2)-Grant of licence for passage broker/recruiting agent-Withdrawal of decision --Respondent on wrong assumption of fact that High Court's order contained directive for grant of licence for passage broker/recruiting agent, issuing licence in favour of petitioner--Respondent on finding that there was no such directive withdrawing same-Contention that decision for grant of licence once taken cannot be withdrawn, subsequently, held, not correct in circumstances. [pp. 1985, 198714, D & E (b)Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981 )- -- Art. 9-Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), S. 12 (2)-Grant of licence for passage broker/recruiting agent-Withdrawal of decision-Opportunity of personal hearing-Respondent, in pursuance of order of High Court issuing letter to petitioner containing decision for grant of licence for passage broker/recruiting agent but subsequently withdrawing such decision without affording opportunity to petitioner of hearing-Order, held, without lawful authority, set aside, in circumstances. [p. 1987)8 & F /p> Date of hearing : 12th September, 1983.
JUDGJENT ' AJMAL MIAN, J.-This petition is directed against the order, dated 1-8-1982, passed by the respondent No,
2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of the above petition are, that the petitioner was granted licence No, 346 on 7-11-1973 for passage broker/recruiting agent under Emigration Act, 1922. It seems that under a letter, dated 2-8-1975 the above licence was suspended. After that the petitioner filed a petition (being C. P. No, D-1235 of 1980 in this Court) in which on 4-3-1981, the following consent order was passed. The petition was dismissed in limine.
"The learned Standing Counsel states that in case the petitioner makes a fresh application for grant of a licence the same shall be considered by the respondents on its merits and regardless of charges as were levelled against him and on the basis of which he had been tried and acquitted by the Magistrate.
' Mr. Sibghatullah Hameed on such undertaking withdraws his petition and the same is dismissed in limine."
' It further seems that after passing of the above order, the petitioner moved an application for a licence. In response to which, the petitioner was issued a letter, dated 11-3-1982, which reads as follows :- "No, 15-1-(0634)/KAR/82/4242 Islamabad the 11th March, 1982 ' From : Muhammad Sadiq, ' Assistant Director, ' To : Mr. Furqan Ahmed Qureshi, ' 359-Al-Noor Chambers, Plaza Square, ' M. A. Jinnah Road, Karachi.
' Subject:-Grant of Overseas Employment Promoter Licence to Messrs K. Q. Traders, Karachi, ' Dear Sir.
' I am directed to refer to our letter No, 346/KAR/81, dated 20-10-1981 and to inform that in compliance with the orders of the Honourable High Court of Sind at Karachi, the Director-General, Bureau of Emigration and Overseas Employment, Islamabad, is pleased to grant you an Overseas Employment Promoter Licence.
(2) You are, therefore, advised to please complete the following formalities immediately to enable us to issue the licence to you.
(i) Deposit Rs, 1,00,000 as Security Deposit in Habib Bank Limited, Super Market F-6/I, Islamabad, in the following head of account.
"Ministry of Manpower, Promoters Security Account No, 458-56."
(ii) Deposit licence fee of Rs, 5.000 as provided under the Emigration Rules, 1979 (sub-rule (3) of rule 8).
(3) On furnishing of evidence of the deposit of security and/or licence fee referred to above in para. 2, a licence will be issued to you.
(Sd.) Muhammad Sadiq, Assistant Director.
' It also seems that after that on 1-8-1982, the impugned order was passed, it may be advantageous to reproduce the same hereinbelow, which reads as follows :- "Mr. Furqan Ahmad Qureshi, Proprietor, ' Messrs K. Q. Traders, ' 359-Al-Noor Chambers, Plaza Square, ' M. A. Jinnah Road, Karachi.
' Subject : Grant of Overseas Employment Promoter's Licence to Messrs K. Q. Traders, Karachi.
' Dear Sir.
' I am directed to refer to our Demand Notice No, 15-1 (0346)/KAR/82 dated the 11th March, 1982, on the subject mentioned above and to inform you to please treat the above-mentioned/quoted letter as withdrawn as the same was issued on misinterpretation of the orders of the Sind High Court, Karachi, under which it was not mandatory on Bureau's part to renew your licence. As far as merits of the case are concerned, the licence cannot be recommended.
' Yours faithfully, (Sd.) Muhammad Sadiq, Assistant Director."
' The petitioner being aggrieved by the above order has filed the present petition.
2. (a) In support of the above petition Mr. Ilyas Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged as follows :-
(1) That under section 12(2) of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, once a licence is granted by the Federal Government, it becomes final and therefore, the impugned order could not have been passed.
(ii) That in any case the above impugned order could not have been passed without hearing the petitioner on his application filed in terms B of the above consent order dated 4-3-1983.
(b) On the other hand, Mr. Syed Inayat Ali, learned counsel for the respondents has contended as follows :-
(i) That since the order, dated 11-3-1982 was passed on the wrong assumption of fact that there was a mandatory direction of the High Court to issue a licence in favour of the petitioner, though there was in fact no directive issued, the above order could have been recalled.
(ii) That as regards the second contention of Mr. Ilyas Khan, Mr. Inayat Ali, learned counsel for the respondents has conceded that the petitioner's application for grant of fresh licence could not have been declined without hearing him.
3. From the above-quoted letter, dated 11-3-1982, it is evident that the same was issued on the wrong assumption of fact that the High Court had issued a directive to the respondents to issue a licence in favour of the petitioner, though factually there was no such directive issued. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to hold that the above letter, dated 11-3-1982 containing the decision of granting the aforesaid licence to the petitioner could have been withdrawn by the respondents and section 12(2) of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, relied upon by Mr. Ilyas Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner has no application to the instant case.
4. As regards the above-mentioned second submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it may again be mentioned that Mr. Inayat Ali has conceded that the petitioner should have been heard before his application was declined.
We, therefore, allow the petition to the extent of declaring that they portion of the impugned order, dated 1-8-1982 which purported to decline the petitioner's application on merits without hearing the petitioner is without lawful authority and of no legal effect, and shall be deemed to have been pending. However, we are not inclined to declare the other portion of the above order, dated 1-8- 1982 as without lawful authority, as the letter dated 11-3-1982 could have been withdrawn for the aforesaid reasons referred to F hereinabove in para.
3. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms with no orders as to costs. Respondent No, 2 shall decide the petitioner's aforesaid application within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after notice to the petitioner.