JUDGMENT CH. IJAZ AHMAD. J.- The petitioner has filed this, writ petition with the following prayer Under the circumstances explained above it is respectfully prayed that this petition may kindly be accepted and constitution of fissile monitoring committees District Faisalabad through nomination may kindly be declared illegal arid of no legal effect and without lawful authority.
It is further prayed that till the final. Disposal of.-this petition Tehsil monitoring committee may graciously be restrained from working any, further till the final disposal this petition.
2. The teamed counsel of the petitioner submits that the respondents have no authority whatsoever to nominate Monitoring Committees in view of Section 67(vri) of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance IXII of 2001). We. Further submits that the respondents have the onlv authority to constitute four types of Monitoring Committees in viee of the. Aforesaid provision of law Through election put the respondents nominated twenty seven types of Monitoring Committees.
3.The learned Additional Advocate General submits that action of the respondents is in accordance with the law and the petitioner has an alternative remedy,, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed:
4. The petitioner impleaded the nominated members of the Committees in C.M. 3/02 in which the office was direct of to send notices to the respondents mentioned in C.M. 3/02. The office sent notices through the agency of Sr. Civil Judge concerned to the respondents who either refused to receive notices or received notices but they did not enter appearance in-spite of notices, therefore, ex parte order is passed against them except respondent No. 55. Learned counsel of respondent No. 5 submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and adopts the arguments of learned Addl.
A.-G.
5. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of the parties ans perused the record ourself it is better and appropriate to re-produce Section 57 law of the Pubian Local Government Ordinance (XIII of 200I) to resolve the controversy between the parties which is as under:- "67(vii) To elect Monitoring Committee and the Tehsil Council to monitor the working of the Tehsil, Municipal Administration and the provision of municipal services."
The bare reading of the aforesaid Section clearly reveals that it is the duty cast upon the respondents to constitute four types of Monitoring Committees through election but 'the respondents nominated twenty seven types of Committees instead of four types of M.Cs. It is a settled principle of law when a thing is to be done in a particular manner it must be done in that particular manner and not otherwise. The respondents have nominated the members in violation- of the aforesaid mandatory provision of law. Therefore, their nomination is not sustainable in the eyes of law, as per principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Atta Muhammad Qureshi v. The Settlement Commissioner. Lahore Division, Lahore and 2 others" (PLD 1971 S.C. 611. The preliminary question raised by the learned Addl.. Advocate General has no force as the nomination of the members is clearly in violation of the mandatory provision of (aw)
6. For what has been discussed above, the writ petition is, accepted and the respondents are directed to constitute four types of Monitoring Committees in terms of the provisions of Section 67(v;i) of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, (XIII of 2001). A copy of this judgment he sent to the secretary Local Government and Rural Development and the Chief Secretary, Punjab who are directed tn briny into the notice of the competent authority so that guide lines be issued to the District Government to act m accordance with the. Iaw and in terms of the provisions of Punjab Local Government Ordinance !XIII of 2001) otherwise the whole system of District Government will destroy and the purpose would not achieve. With these observations the petition is accepted.