' By means of my order dated 10th June 1976, passed in Writ Petition No, 7-R of 1976, I had remanded the case, with the following observations I- "I would, therefore, allow this petition to the extent that the impugned memorandum is declared to be without lawful authority and as such of no legal effect. The Department would issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and then decide the matter in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner."
' On remand, the matter was taken by the Additional Settlement Commissioner (Industries Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Lahore, who by his order dated 3-1-1977, allowed one Abdul Aziz informer, to join the remand proceedings, and directed Noor Muhammad to produce the entire evidence on the next date i,e, 18-1-1977.
The petitioner felt aggrieved by the aforesaid order; hence this constitutional petition under Article 199 of the present Constitution.
2. Before dealing with the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner I may observe that the dispute in the earlier petition and even at present is with regard to the transfer price of Jaswant Building, old Vakilkhana, Patiala Ground, Lahore, which was transferred to the petitioner against a sum of Rs, 75,60d, but subsequently Memorandum No, 992/ POL/74/299, dated 19-124974, was issued, whereby the petitioner was required to pay a sum of Rs, 3,20,200. It was this memorandum which I had set aside and remitted the case.
3. Now the grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that before a certified copy of my judgment could be placed before the Additional Settlement Commissioner he proceeded with the case in accordance with the note of the Administrative Advocate of the Department which was to the following effect :- (a)A show-cause notice is to be issued to Noor Muhammad asking him to pay the difference of transfer price amounting to Rs, 3,20,200.
(b) Mr. Wadood Ahmed and others the occupants of Jaswant Building are also to be called for to assist the Court.
(c) To make request to the civil Court/Rent Controller to stay ejectment proceedings against the occupants of Jaswa nt Building.
' Learned counsel submitted that the respondent has taken the aforesaid note as a directive and is not proceeding in accordance with law nor is he acting in a judicial manner. The two instances he gave in support of his submission: first, that the respondent permitted an informer to join the proceedings without deciding the objection raised by the petitioner that an informer had no right to become a party to these proceedings, secondly, that respondent No, 2 permitted the counsel for the informer to cross-examine the witness on behalf of the Court. According to the learned counsel this concession was contrary to law because it amounted to delegate the functions of the Court to a stranger to the proceedings. Learned counsel submitted that such a procedure and practice was unknown to all judicial norms and the respondent was acting in whimsical manner.
4. Mr. Maqbool Elahi Malik, who appeared on behalf of the Department, assured me that the case of the petitioner would be dealt with in accordance with law and in a judicial manner. He even gave an undertaking that, if need be, in future he would personally appear before the officer and would see that the proceedings are conducted with full judicial propriety.
5. Undoubtedly, the proceedings before respondent No, 2 are of judicial nature and those bad to be conducted in a judicial manner, and for that matter it is necessary for the Presiding Officer to conduct such proceedings not only with an unbiased mind but also he should not give an impression of any kind from which a party could infer that the Presiding Officer was not paying proper attention to his case. He must, therefore, not be influenced by any other consideration than the material on the record, because it is not only necessary that justice must be done but it is equally important that it must also be seen to have been done.
6. I would, therefore, direct respondent No, 2 to dud with the matter in a judicial manner and if during the course of proceedings any relevant objection is raised, he should first decide that and then determine the rest of the matter in accordance with law.
' With these observations the writ petition is disposed of but there shall be no order as to costs.