SAAD SAOOD JAN, J. ---By a notification issued on 4-6-1984 under Martial Law Order No.81 the Federal Government declared all films produced in India in any language to be uncertified films in the whole of Pakistan. The petitioner who claims to be the owner of the film known as the (Anmol Ghari) which was produced in India filed a Constitution petition in the High Court to challenge the legality of the said notification in so far as it related to the said film. During the pendency of the petition there was a compromise between the parties and in accordance thereof the following consent order was made:-- "Respondent No.2, Central Board of Film Censors at Islamabad shall consider application filed by the petitioner on 13-5-1981 for certification of film 'Anmol Ghari' in terms of relief already granted and as stated in Judgment dated 29-11-1983 in Civil Petition No.D-888 of 1982. It would be satisfactory if this application is disposed of within three months from today. "
Despite the above-said consent order the Central Board of Film Censors, Islamabad, declined to examine the matter again and disposed of the prayer of the petitioner in this regard with the following communication: "Central Board of Film Censors have considered your application. It is regretted that in view of the general orders contained in the Notification No.S.R.O. 461(1)/84, dated 4-6-1984, on exhibition of all films including feature, trailers and shorts produced in India, your film titled 'Anmol Ghari' (Fr. Urdu) produced in India cannot be certified for exhibition. "
The petitioner filed another Constitution petition in the High Court which was allowed and a direction was issued to the Federal Government in the following terms:-- "For reasons to be recorded separately, we allow this petition to the extent that it is declared that respondents are bound to take steps to consider the certification of film 'Anmol Ghari' vide consent order dated 22-8-1988 passed by this Court in Civil Petition No. D-69 of 1986 and further declare that the stand taken by them in their letter dated 21-11-1988 was not in furtherance of the said order. We accordingly direct the respondents to at upon consent order dated 22-8-1988."
The respondents called in question the judgment of the High Court through a petition for special leave to appeal which was dismissed with the following observations:- "Actually, after action has been taken under Martial Law Order No.81 of 1980 on 4-6-1984, power under sub-paragraph (2) of Paragraph 4 of Martial Law Order No.81 of 1980 becomes exercisable by the designated authority. It is that power which is sought to be exercised under the consent order and which the petitioners have refused to exercise. The direction is quite appropriate to the occasion and to the power possessed by the petitioners."
The petitioner has moved this present application for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Court Law against the respondent for not complying with the direction issued by the High Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we are not persuaded that the application for initiating action against the respondents under the law of contempt has been properly filed in this Court. This application is in substance one and for seeking the enforcement of the order which was made by the High Court and with which this Court declined to interfere by refusing to grant leave to appeal to the respondents. Thus, if there has been any violation, it is that of the order of the High Court. Apart from that, clause (2) of Article 187 of the Constitution reads as follows:-- "Any such direction, order of decree shall be enforceable throughout Pakistan and shall, where it is to be executed in a Province, or a territory or an area not forming part of a Province but within the jurisdiction of the High Court of the Province, be executed as if it had been issued by the High Court of that Province."
As will be noticed under this clause order of this Court has to be executed as if it has been issued by the High Court of the Province concerned.
3. With these observations this petition is dismissed.