Briefly stated the facts are that petitioner is a Welfare Association duly registered under Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies (Registration and Control) Ordinance, 1961 vide Registration Certificate No.VSWA/ICT/268, dated 28-12-1996, issued by Registration Authority and Asif Jamal being its President has been authorized to file the instant writ petition. The stand of petitioner is that in 1986 Senate of Pakistan adopted a resolution to grant ownership rights of G-6 Quarters by selling the quarters occupied by the Government Servants. Later on during election of 1988 Pakistan Peoples Party promised to give ownership rights to the occupants of G-6 Quarters, if elected, that during the general election of 1990 both the major parties, namely Muslim League and PPP, promised to deliver the quarters to its occupants (Government Servants) on ownership. Basis, by selling them on reasonable price, that on April, 2nd, 1991 during the first Government of Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, the Ministry for Housing and Works confirmed on the floor of the National Assembly that matter pertaining to the ownership of G-6 Quarter occupants was under serious consideration of the Government, that a similar announcement was made on 5-4-1991 by the then Minister for Housing and Works flanked by the then Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, Muhammad Nawaz Khokhar and Senator (Retd.) Brig. Muhammad Hayat, that in -prosecution of their promise on 10-7-1993 the then Prime Minister of Pakistan Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif issued an order on a D.O. Letter dated 5-7-1993 addressed to him by the then Deputy Speaker which reads as follows:- - "I visited to the quarters personally and I am convinced that the residents are poor and deserve to be given the right of ownership. Please issue order. "
Later on a directive was issued by the Prime Minister Secretariat, which was signed by the Additional Secretary dated 12-7-1993. The occupants of G-6 Quarters believing the promise/inducement of policy declaration of the Government took loan from House Building Advance/GP Fund Advance and started renovating their respective quarters, believing that it would be transferred to them on ownership basis. As the respondents have not fulfilled their promise, so the petitioner has been constrained to file the instant petition for a direction to Respondents Nos. l and 2 to implement the order dated 10-7-1993 and directive dated 12-7-1993 transferring the ownership rights to the occupants of G-6 Quarters of Islamabad, by following and obeying doctrine of promissory estoppel which is based on the principle of equity and justice.
2. Comments of Respondents Nos. l and 2 have been called which have been placed on record and similarly Respondent No.3 has also submitted its comments.
3. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
4. Main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as the then Prime Minister of Pakistan had issued a directive on 10-7-1996 on the D.O. Addressed to him by the then Deputy Speaker of National Assembly dated 5-7-1993 for conferring proprietary rights on the occupants of G-6 Quarters, so the respondents be directed to implement the said directive. His stand is that on the basis of said directive another directive dated 12-7-1993 was issued by the Additional Secretary (E & F). He contended that Respondents Nos. l and 2 are bound by promissory estoppel to fulfil the promise made by them and placed reliance upon Asif Iqbal v. Karachi Metropolitan Corporation and 2 others (PLD 1994 Karachi 60), Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and 2 others v. Salahuddin and 3 others (PLD 1991 SC 546) and Mst. Nur Jehan Begun through Legal Representatives v. Syed Mujtaba A.I Naqvi (1991 SCMR 2300).
5. Conversely the writ has been controverted by the aimed counsel for the Respondents Nos.1 and
2. It asserted by him that no promise was ever made by the Government for the transfer of G-6 Quarters to the occupants of the same. His contention is that mere directive dated 10-7-1993 by the then Prime Minister of Pakistan endorsed on a D.O. Dated 5-7-1993 of the then Deputy Speaker of National Assembly does not create any right on the basis of doctrine of promissory estoppel. He argued that had any further steps been taken to implement the said directive the principal of promissory estoppel could be pressed into service. He further submitted that when the actual facts relating to matter in issue were brought into the notice of the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, he was pleased to re-call the said directive. He asserted that Government property can be transferred/alienated in accordance with law on that subject and same can't be disposed of on the basis of mere promises, that there does not exist any legislation for, conferring proprietary rights upon the occupants of G-6 Quarters, so by mere promises said right can't be conferred, that the writ petition is devoid of any legal force and the same be dismissed.
6. 'Learned counsel for Respondent No.3 contended that issue pertaining to the allotment of Government owned quarters in G-6 Sector to the occupants on ownership basis has remained under the consideration of Government for quite sometime that a summary for the Cabinet was prepared and placed for its approval on 14-1-1993. The said summary was approved by the Cabinet vide minutes dated 24-1-1993. In the light of said decision, a summary was again prepared keeping in view the directive of the Prime Minister, dated 10-7-1993 and the same was placed before the then Prime Minister who was pleased to put the matter in the Cabinet vide its approval vide summary dated 8-8-1994. Accordingly the Cabinet for decision dated 22-8-1994 constituted a Committee to suggest different options on the re-- development of section G-6. Consequently different options were suggested by the said Committee and a summary for the approval of Cabinet was prepared on 30-11-1994. The said proposals were approved by the Cabinet on 13-3- 1995. He thus, submits that if at all said promise dated 10-7-1993 was made it never saw the light of day and it stood revoked on 13-3-1995. He further argued that petitioners have not brought on record any documentary evidence to show that they have ever spent even a single penn--on these quarters. He also challenged the legal value of the directive and asserted that it never conferred or created any right in favour of petitioners, as it did not see light of the day. It was thus, prayed that there is no force in this writ petition and the same be dismissed.
7. Instant writ petition has been filed by the occupants of quarters of G-6 Sector, Islamabad, contending that vide order, dated f0-7-1993 passed on a D.O. Dated 5-7-1993 initiated by the then Deputy Speaker, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan was pleased to order that the said quarters be allotted to its occupants. Even if the said assertion is accepted as correct, does it mean that any vested rights have been created in their favour, certainly not. Admittedly said quarters belong to the Government of Pakistan and these can be transferred in accordance with law on that subject and not merely on the basis of promises. These quarters are being occupied by Government servants and its rent is being deducted out of their salaries. By no stretch of imagination proprietary rights in respect of these quarters can be conferred upon them through a directive, even if the same has been issued by the Prime Minister of Pakistan. In order to confer proprietary rights in respect of these quarters Federal legislation is necessary, which is lacking in the instant case. The mere fact that a D.O. Was addressed by the then Deputy Speaker of National Assembly to the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, requesting for the conferment of the proprietary rights upon the occupants of G-6 Sector and consequently the then Prime Minister of Pakistan was pleased to issue a directive conceding the said request, does not mean that any vested rights have been created in their favour. Had the said directive dated 10-7-1993 been transformed in the shape of notification, it could be argued that said directive has got some legal sanctity. Admittedly the said directive never took the shape of any notification as such it never conferred any -rights on the other party. It is also fact that even this directive dated 10-7-1993 was never communicated to the occupants of G-6 Quarters occupants. Thus, even if it is assumed that a directive was issued on 10- 7-1993, but as the same was not communicated to the occupants, so it will not create any right in their f favour. Doctrine of promissory estoppel can be pressed into service if as a result of said promise some tangible steps are taken to implement the said promise. No tangible steps whatsoever have been taken by the Government to implement the so-called directive/promise dated 10-7-1993. On the other hand matter regarding re-development of sector G-6 Islamabad has remained under the active consideration of the Cabinet as is evident from summery for the Cabinet dated 14-1-1993. The said summery was approved on 24-1-1993 wherein it was decided that said sector be re-developed. Accordingly various proposals were formulated in a summery dated 8-8-1994 in which directive dated 10-7-1993 was also considered. It was decided that the matter be placed before the Cabinet for its approval. As a result of deliberation of the Cabinet, a committee was constituted to suggest different opinion for its development. As per decision of the Cabinet dated 22-8-1994, the said Committee submitted its proposals vide summery dated 30-11- 1994 which were approved by the Cabinet vide decision dated 13-3-1995. All these decisions reveal that the directive, dated 10-7-1993 was not finally approved and it stood revoked.
8. The up shot of above discussion is that as no vested right has been created in favour of petitioner on the basis of a simple directive dated 10-7-1993, which also stood revoked, so they are not entitled to the relief sought by them. Resultantly petition fails and is hereby dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.