JUSTICE MUHAMMAD QASIM JAN KHAN (CHAIRMAN).---This judgment will dispose of an appeal filed by Nisar-ulHaq, challenging the vires of an interim order dated 24-11-2001, vide which the learned Members of the Disciplinary Committee of the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council, Peshawar overrufing the preliminary objection raised by the appellant regarding the non-existence of inherent jurisdiction of the Committee to probe into the case of misconduct.
2. Facts of the case are that Shams-ul-Haq filed a complaint in the N.-W.F.P. Bar Counsel, Peshawar against the appellant alleging therein that the petitioner was the member of he Board of Governors of Public High School, Hangu in the year, 1995 and the respondent Nisar-ul-Haq was posted there sins e 7-12-1985 as a Teacher, who remained there till August, 1989 and was regularly drawing the salary. The appellant with the exception of one or two days casual leave has not taken any long leave during this period. It was further averred in the complaint that the respondent during the service has performed the apprenticeship and remained attached to the legal profession has violated the provisions of Legal Practitioner and Bar Councils Act; 1973 and the rules framed thereunder, has committed professional misconduct and is liable to be removed from the role of Advocates.
3. The Disciplinary Committee of the N.W.F.P. Bar Council initiated proceedings against the appellant and the appellant submitted written statement refuting the allegations contained in. the complaint. It was on 13-10-2001 that the appellant submitted an application raising a preliminary objection that the N.-W.F.P., Bar Council has got no inherent jurisdiction to probe into the allegations of the complainant. The Disciplinary Committee after hearing the parties and their counsel and considering the data available on the record, overruled the objection and proceeded with the trial of the case, hence the present appeal.
4. We have heard Mr. Wali Khan Afridi, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Muhammad Rafiq, Advocate for the respondent and A.A.-G. for the Government and with their assistance have perused the record of the case. It was submitted on behalf of the appellant that the allegations contained in the complaint do not constitute a case of professional misconduct and thus, the N.- W.F.P. Bar Council is bereft of jurisdiction to entertain the complaint against the appellant. It was also submitted that no jural relations of counsel and client is existing between the parties.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent and A.A.-G. vehemently contended that the completion of apprenticeship and attachment to legal profession during the service of the appellant, if proved, definitely constitute a case of professional misconduct entailing the penalty contained in section 41 of the Act (ibid), and the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council being an institution, on whose roll the appellant is entered as an Advocate, has got the jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint.
6. We have given bur anxious consideration to the facts of the instant case. Perusal of the complaint would show that allegations levelled therein merit deep probe by the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council. Admittedly, appellant is an Advocate duly enrolled with the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council, which is the institution, to which the appellant owes his existence. The averments are such which attract the provisions of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 and the rules framed therein. Under section 41 of the Act, (ibid), it is not only the professional misconduct but also other conduct of an Advocate, which can be looked into by the N. W.F.P. Bar Council. A similar point of existence or otherwise regarding the jurisdiction of the Bar Council came for consideration in the reported case titled Qamar Zaman Shinwari v. Nadir Shah Gillani, Advocate, Kohat (1996 M LD 513) and Muhammad Khan v. Anwar Baig, Advocate, Swat (2001 M LD 906) and in these cases with respect to the similar' facts, the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council assumed the jurisdiction and probed into the matter of misconduct. So, the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council has got a plenary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint against the appellant.
7. The impugned order passed by the learned Members of the Disciplinary Committee of the N.- W.F.P. Bar Council is perfectly sound, legal and in consonance with the established principles of justice and calls for no interference.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances narrated above, there is no force in the present appeal, which is hereby dismissed, with no orders as to costs. Parties are directed to appear before the Disciplinary Committee of the N.W.F.P. Bar Council, Peshawar on 18-5-2002.