This judgment shall dispose of Execution Application No.7 of 1997 alongwith C.M. No.1023-C of 1997 (seeking execution of order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 30-6-1997 in Civil Petition No.626/97) and Writ Petition No.1955 of 1997 seeking a direction to the Capital Development Authority to restore Sunday Bazar in Sector G-9 Islamabad. In Execution Application No.7 of 1997 the facts in brief are that the applicants filed a civil suit for a declaration and seeking a direction to the CDA that it should not hold Jumma Bazar in Sectors G-6, -9 and G-10 on Sundays and that old arrangement of holding these Bazars on Friday should continue. The application for temporary injunction having been dismissed by the civil Court, the learned District Judge and the High Court (C.R. No.151 of 1997), the applicants went to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Petition No.626 of 1997 which was disposed of in the following terms:-- "The learned counsel for the parties are present in the Court and state that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties outside the Court which has been reduced to writing and has been signed by the parties. It is further submitted that in view of this compromise the petitioners request for withdrawal of the petition, which stands disposed of in terms of the compromise. "
On 21-7-1997 the Capital Development Authority passed the following order:-- "Subject: Shifting of Itwar Bazar From G-9 to G-10 Islamabad.
Now the bazar will be held in the following sequence:-- Itwar Bazar G-6 Itwar Bazar G-10 Mangal Bazar I-9 Mangal Bazar G-9 Jumma Bazar G-9 D.G. (Planning) in reference to Sanitation Dated Letter No.CDA/DS-10(6)/97/2085, dated 11-7-1997 is requested to depute a Town Planner for demarcation of Itwar Bazar G-10 as ad hoc arrangement made by the Sanitation Dated in G-10 bazar are not proving satisfactory and customers as well as stall holders are facing difficulties. "
Certain stall, holders who were aggrieved of the afore-referred order of the CDA under the impression that the said order was passed pursuant to the august Supreme Court order dated 30- 6-1997 filed a petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court for clarification of the order dated 30-6- 1997 which application was returned by the Registrar. This order of the Registrar was challenged in appeal and the august Supreme Court (C.M.A. No.4 of 1997) vide order dated 28-7-1997 disposed of the appeal on the statement made by the learned counsel of CDA in the following terms:-- "In view of abovesaid categoric statement of counsel for respondents that aforementioned letter dated 21-7-1997 has been issued independently and has no nexus with any previous compromise, I feel that clarification sought for is not required. Any party aggrieved from said directive/order can always approach forum of competent jurisdiction for proper redress. Appeal is disposed of accordingly."
On 16th August, 1997 the Capital Development Authority passed yet another order which is to the following effect:-- "Subject: Revised Schedule of Weekly Bazars Itwar BazarG-6 Itwar BazarG-9Sunday Itwar BazarG-10 Jumma BazarG-9 Jumma BazarI-9Friday Mangal BazarG-9 Mangal BazarI-9 Tuesday
2. It is further notified that licensees of all the weekly bazars shall close their stalls soon after sunset and shall not leave any merchandise, articles and commodities etc, in the bazar, They will also remove their permanent structures immediately. In case of non-compliance, the Authority shall be constrained to cancel their licences and remove their structures at their risk and cost. "
2. The grievance being voiced in Execution Application No.7 of 1997 is that the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 30-6-1997 was given effect to by the Capital Development Authority vide the afore-referred order dated 21=7-1997. However, subsequent to that the respondents in utter violation of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court, have issued order dated 16-8-1997 which is detrimental to the interest of the applicants and the prayer being made is that this Court exercising powers under Article 198(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with Order 47, Rule 15, C.P.C. Can execute the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
3. In C.M. No.1023-C of 1997 (in Execution Application No.7 of 1997) vacation of interim order passed by this Court in the afore-referred application is sought.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in terms of the compromise arrived at before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the CDA had agreed that instead of Friday Bazar in G-6 Bazar shall be held on Sundays and that Bazar held in Sectors G-9 and I-9 would be held on Tuesday and Bazar in G-6 and G-10 were to be held on Sundays and Bazar G-9 were agreed to be held on Friday. It was further agreed that those who hold bazars on Sundays in G-9 will maintain bazar in G-9 on Fridays and licensees who hold Bazar on Jumma in G-9 will hold Bazar in G-10 on Sunday in future. It was only in terms of the agreement made with the CDA that the applicants had withdrawn Civil Petition No.626 of 1997 and that the terms of the compromise being part of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have to be given effect to by this Court and the CDA cannot be resiled from the same.
5. Learned counsel for CDA and Syed Zafar A.I Shah, Advocate, on the other hand, submitted that the order dated 30-6-1997 is not an order within the ambit of Article 187(3) of the Constitution; that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had merely granted permission to withdraw the civil petition; that the order dated 21-7-1997 was independently passed by the CDA; that the objection with regard to Bazar being held in G-9 on Sunday having been removed by the stall holders, the CDA passed the appropriate order and the Chairman restored holding of Sunday Bazar in Sector G-9 and that under Article 187(2) of the Constitution this Court cannot execute the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and if the original order was passed by the Civil Court, the matter has to be transmitted to the civil Court concerned for execution and that the learned counsel for the applicant has misconceived the order of the august Supreme Court.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner (in Writ Petition No.1955 of 1997) adopted the arguments of the learned counsel for the CDA and submitted that the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was merely a permission to withdraw Civil Petition No. 626 of 1997 and had not issued any direction execution of which can be made by this Court.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also given anxious thoughts to the arguments addressed at the bar.
8. In para.6 of the parawise comments to the Execution Application and writ petition submitted by the CDA, the background to the compromise arrived at between the parties has been explained. It has been submitted as follows:-- "The learned Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on 26-6-1997 (by an inadvertence it had been typed as 26-7-1997) directed that apart from the disputed notification the first recommendation of the committee and the order of the Chairman should be considered by the parties as a basis for compromise. Accordingly, on 30-6-1997 a compromise was affected between the parties on the basis of the first recommendation of the committee headed by Syed Zafar A.I Shah. This compromise was accepted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan and the petition was disposed of in terms of the compromise. " of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was on account of the Terms of the compromise were admittedly as follows:-- "(i) It has been unanimously decided by the parties that the bazar held in G-6 Islamabad on Fridays shall be held on Sundays in nature in compliance with the order of the Chairman CDA dated 10-3-1997.
(ii) The Bazars held in G-9 and I-9 shall in future be held on Tuesdays, the Bazars held in G-6 and G-10 shalj in future be held on Sundays and the Bazars held in G-9 will in future shall be held on Fridays. Those who hold Bazars on Sundays in G-9 will maintain Bazar in G-9 on Friday and Licensees who hold Bazar on Jumma in G-9 will hold Bazar in G-10 on Sunday in future.
(iii) It is also agreed between the parties that the petitioners of C.P. 626 of 1997 shall make a request to the august Supreme Court for permission to withdraw the said civil petition on the ground that the matter has been settled amicably between the parties outside the Court. "
1968 SCMR 557) the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld an order passed for detention of a person who had violated an undertaking before the Court. With the foregoing observations, Execution Application. No. 7 of 1997 is disposed of.
However, as the question raised in these proceedings is a matter of public importance so far as Islamabad City is concerned I am persuaded to direct the learned Civil Court seized of the civil suit titled as Muhammad Zaman v. CDA etc. To decide the said suit within a' period of one month from today.
9. In view of the order passed in Execution Application No. 7 of 1997 Writ Petition No.1955 of 1991 is not maintainable as no direction can De issued to the CDA to proceed in a manner which is in conflict with the arrangement arrived at before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petition having no merit is, therefore, dismissed.