This order pertains to the following writ petitions w ere not only the facts but the grievances are also akin:-- Writ Petition 10206 of 1998; Writ Petition 10214 of 1998; Writ Petition 9315 of 1998; Writ Petition 9316 of 1998; Writ Petition 9317 of 1998; Writ Petition 10207 of 1998; Writ Petition 10226 of 1998; Writ Petition 13621 of 1999; Writ Petition 13622 of 1999; Writ Petition 13623 of 1999; Writ Petition 13624 of 1999; Writ Petition 13625 of 1999; Writ Petition 13626 of 1999; Writ Petition 17098 of 1999; Writ Petition 24552 of 2000; Writ Petition 24553 of 2000; Writ Petition 24712 of 2000 and Writ Petition 23039 of 2000,
2. The brief facts are as follows; An advertisement appeared in the daily "Jang, Lahore" on 23-6- 1996, inviting applications against cash consideration for sale of Ursus-2812 Tractors under the Awami Tractor Scheme formulated by the Federal Government of Pakistan. The advance payment was fixed at Rs.70,000. The balance of the payment had to be made thereafter. It was further stated in the advertisement that on lump sum down payment of Rs.2,30,000 there is to be no variation in price until delivery, whereas, on payment of advance Rs.70,000 only if there was variation in price of dollar, an additional amount may be payable at the time of the The petitioners were allured by the said advertisement since ostensibly it appeared to have been issued on instructions of the Federal Government. However, it reflected the name of Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. Having its office at 72-P, Model Town, Lahore, as the author of the advertisement, to whom the money had to be paid. The petitioners submitted bank drafts, the details of which, each one of them, has given in his writ petition. After making the payments, they also obtained receipts against this payment from the Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. Who have been made respondents through their General Manager.
4. Subsequently, the petitioners were asked to pay a sum of Rs.69,000 in excess of the amount already reflected as the price of the tractor in the said advertisement. Payments were received from the petitioners, some of whom have already paid Rs.3,25,000 to the Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd.
5. The Petitioners complained to the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad (respondent No.1) and to the Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad (respondent No.2) for taking necessary action, inter alia, against the Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. For charging the petitioners over and above the agreed rates as well as sales tax, the exemption of which was promised. But it is said that no action was taken by the aforementioned respondents Nos.1 and 2.
Subsequently, the petitioners made applications asking for the delivery of the tractors pursuant to having made the payment. But they were put off on the ground that a litigation had commenced on the question of taxation in view of Writ Petition. No 21994 of 1996 captioned as Muhammad Rafique v. Government of Pakistan at others by this Court.
6. But it is said that the same writ petition had been dismissed on 18-3-1998 by this Court. That there was no impediment in the way of delivery tractors by the said Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. The prayer which is almost common in all these writ petitions and is taken from Writ Petition bearing No. 10206 of 1998 filed by Muhammad Yousaf and others, is as follows:-- "Under the circumstances stated above, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that by accepting this petition respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 may graciously be directed to take action in accordance with law against the respondents Nos.4 and 5.
It is further prayed that respondents Nos.4 and 5 may kindly be directed to give delivery of tractor to the petitioner at appropriate/rate and price contained in advertisement, dated 23-6-1996.
Any other appropriate relief which this Honourable Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted with costs. "
7. Some of these matters are pending before is Court since 1996. The Order-Sheet reflects a non- serious attitude on part of some of the private respondents, whose presence before the Court was only possible after stringent orders.
8. On 1-2-2000, a petitioner before this Court, showed photo-copy of a letter which reflected that the tractor already allotted to Muhammad Ashraf of Writ Petition No.9316 of 1998, had been surreptitiously and dishonestly sold to one Muhammad Imran son of Muhammad Rafique of Quetta. It was further said that there were many such instances of this kind. That these transactions establish a clear fraud on the part of the Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. Whereby, so many poor citizens of Pakistan have been robbed of their money in the name of the "Awami Tractor Scheme."
9. A copy of the allotment letter in case of Muhammad Ashraf and the subsequent transfer letter were handed over to the learned counsel for the respondent Khyber Tractor (Pvt.) Ltd. For clearing their position but they have submitted nothing in this respect.
10. It has been pointed out that a matter was sub judice before the Supreme Court of Pakistan on the question of demurrage to be charged against the tractors already received and parked with the Karachi Port Trust Authority and the order of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan was awaited.
11. The stand of the Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. Is that they were willing to deliver the tractors in case the Honourable Supreme Court decided the matter inter se them and the Karachi Port Trust Authority in their favour. The petitioners have nothing to do with this matter.
12. The Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Live Stock in its reply has provided the following report:-- "Briefly the position is that former elected Government started Awami Tractors Scheme (Phase-1) under which Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan arranged import of 12000 tractors from Belurussia and 8000 from Poland. Imports were allowed at zero rate of duty and taxes. The Unit cost of tractor was kept at Rs.150,000. After completion of Phase-I, the Cabinet in its meeting held on 24th June, 1996, decided to continue the Awami Tractors Scheme under Phase-II but with changed parameters i.e. Each importer would establish L/C at his cost and that no credit facility would be available to farmers under A.T.S. Phase-II. It was further decided that the letter of credit (L/C) established for import of tractors up to June 30, 1996, would be allowed concessionary custom duty (10%) and zero Sales Tax. On the basis of the Cabinet decision, this Ministry issue authorization to following individual importers:--- S.No. Name of Importers Quantity Allowed
(1) Messrs Millat Tractors Ltd. (Massey Ferguson)4,992
(2) Messrs Al-Ghazi Tractors Ltd. (Fiat Tractors)5,000
(3) Messrs Fecto Tractors Ltd.
(Belarus Tractors from Byelorussia)11,000
(4) Messrs Khyber Tractors Ltd.
(Ursus Tractors of Poland) 2,720
(5) Messrs Modern Continental Business Ltd. (Chinese Tractors) 2,000
2. Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs Division later moved a summary for the Cabinet proposing with drawn of concession of Sales Tax under A.T.S. The proposal was approved on 9-9- 1996. An understanding was given by the importers that tractors would be supplied to farmers at a rate not exceeding Rs.230,000 per unit on the condition that the Government would ensure providing the same concessions as available under Phase-1. It was also agreed that further adjustment would be allowed in case Pak Rupees versus Dollar parity exceeded Rs.35.72/dollar.
With the withdrawal of the Sales Tax concession and appreciation of dollar versus Pak Rupees, importers revised their tractors prices upwards ranging between Rs.325,000 to Rs.356,000 per unit.
The process of import and disposal of tractors was to be competed latest by 31st December, 1996.
3. The local tractor manufactures and vendor industry instituted a writ petition in the Lahore High Court against 10 respondents including Minfal praying to withdraw concessionary SRO for ATS and restoration of original custom tariff for CBU-tractor i.e. 35% custom duty, 18 % sale tax and 2 % service charges, etc. Simultaneously, Minfal also moved a summary for the ECC proposing withdrawal of the SRO for ATS. ECC's decided that import of tractors in CBU would be allowed on payment of normal custom tariff i.e. 35 % custom duty, 18 % sales tax and other charges which would be given effect after vacation of the stay order granted by the Lahore High Court. The petition was disposed of in favour of the vendor industry. However, Messrs Fecto Tractors Ltd. Filed an intra-Court appeal and obtained a stay order. The Court has passed judgment restraining the Government withdrawing the concession's granted under the Awami Tractors Scheme Phase-II.
4. An appeal was filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan against the judgment of the Lahore High Court in order to restore normal custom tariff on the import of CBU tractors The Court has upheld the decision of the Lahore High Court and provided interim relief to importer from payment of duties and taxes. "
13. While tendering parawise comments, it was further said that the ministry was not responsible and if any fraud had taken place, this was at the end of the supplier. Nothing has been stated with respect to the complaints made by the petitioners to the ministry bringing to its notice the factum of the advertisement and urging for action against the alleged fraud.
14. The petitioners are agriculturists and are looking in askance for relief. On the other hand, the respondents and more specifically the Khyber. Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd. Is only providing subtle excuses.
The report of the Ministry of Agriculture in paragraph underlined above by this Court, shows that even after the interim relief provided to the importers against payment of duties and taxes, the tractors were not released to the petitioners.
15. And it has now come to light that the tractors said to be parked with the Karachi Fort Trust Authority were being gradually put to sale to other customers. Whether the respondents particularly the Khyber Tractors (Pvt.) Ltd have committed a fraud against the poor peasants of Pakistan through their acts of omission of commission, is a matter which calls for investigation.
16. Recurringly, the people of Pakistan have been defrauded and there is no end to it. The accountability of all concerned through an impartial agency can be the sanction and deterrent against future frauds.
17. When schemes like the "Awami Tractors etc." are formulated private dealers and manufacturers join hands with the policy makers and lacunas and infirmities are purposely left in such schemes enabling corrupt practices aimed at defrauding the citizens of Pakistan to take place.
18. Unfortunately, rampant corruption and corrupt practices have eroded the confidence of the people in the governments and have widened the credibility gap between the people and the State. No State can exist having a patent credibility.
19. The alleged omission on the part of the Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Fiance when they were approached by the petitioners and if this is true, reflects an attitude of utter callousness Even if we spare those concerned in these Ministries of any other blame.
20. One of the essential responsibilities of a State/Government is to protect its citizens against fraud and illegal practices more so when its name was also being used in the commission of a public wrong. Caliph Umar Bin Abdul Khatab (may Allah be pleased with him) had said that he was responsible for redressing the problems even faced by the animals in far off places under his caliphate. Hazrat Abbu Bakkar Siddique (may Allah be pleased with him), the First Caliph, had said that one of the basic responsibilities of a Islamic State is to support the weak against the strong when the latter commit wrong against the former. St August in, a great Christian scholar, while defining justice had observed; "What are States without justice but robbers band enlarged". The State has, therefore, to involve itself in the redressal of grievances of petitioners as these.
21. This Court cannot go into a deep inquest as to why and how these people i.e. The petitioners have been let so helpless. The best thing in these cases would be that this job was entrusted to an agency specially constituted for purposes of dealing with corruption and corrupt practices Through a speedy action. Accountability Bureau, one reads the preamble as follows:-- "An Ordinance to provide for the setting up of a National Accountability Bureau so as to eradicate corruption and corrupt practices and hold accountable all those persons accused of such practices and matters ancillary thereto."
23. Corruption and corrupt practices are defined in section 9 of the Ordinance and relate not only to the "holder of a public office" but also "any other person".
24. According to section 22 of the Ordinance, the Chairman may have the investigation conducted by his own agency or in conjunction with any other agency thought to be proper for purposes of such investigation.
25. This Court is, therefore, of the view that this matter be sent to the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau so that he proceeds in accordance with law after such inquiry or investigation as law provides, and in case the Chairman of National Accountability Bureau feels that the matter ought to be investigated by a Provincial Agency like the Provincial Police, it may take its help to according with law. It is further for consideration of the National Accountability Bureau to provide relief to the petitioners through return of their money with reasonable mark-up or in the alternate the delivery of tractors for which they have paid money individually.
26. The Deputy registrar (Judicial) of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order alongwith the copies of the writ petitions to the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau immediately. The Chairman of N.A.B. Is further asked to depute a person authorized by him under the law to procure conies of such documents as may be required for purposes of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court who shall provide the same. It is expected that the National Accountability Bureau will accomplish investigation with convenient despatch in view of the hardship which the petitioners have already been facing since 1996. Anyway, the National Accountability Bureau shall submit a report to this Court within three months from today.
27. As these cases, in view of their peculiar circumstances, have been referred to the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau who has now to submit a report within three months reflecting the action taken in view of the observations made, the writ petitions, therefore, stand disposed of. No order as to costs.