CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.- The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayer:- "In view of above made submissions, it is humbly prayed that stipulation imposed by respondents for giving leases/contracts Serials Nos. 1 to 7 as given in advertisement to one person and enhancing the time period of these leases upto I6 months or less or more than year may very kindly be declared illegal, against Lease Rules, 1990, stipulation imposed to have been passed without lawful authority and abinition. During the pendency of the writ petition auction proceeding over these leases/contract Serials Nos. 1 to 7 may very kindly be suspended. Any other relief which this Honourble Court deems appropriate and justified by awarded to the petitioner."
2. Learned counsel of the petitioner submits that the respondents have issued the public notice qua the contracts/ieases in question in violation of the mandatory provisions of the Punjab Local Council (Lease) Rules, 1990. He further submits that according to Rule 2 of the aforesaid Rules prescribed duty upon the respondents to lease out by public auction for a period not exceeding one year for the collection rights of the tax, fee, rate, tool cess or other charges levelled by Local Council: impugned advertisement itself reveals that the same was issued the respondents, in violation of the aforesaid rules. He further submits that respondents imposed a condition about the giving leases/contracts from serial Nos. 1 to 7 to one person which is also illegal and the respondents have no power and authority to impose any such kind of stipulation which is in violation of the mandatory provisions of the aforesaid rules and the law laid down by the superior Courts. Similarly the condition prescribed by the respondents that the amount in advance to participate in auction proceedings of said leases has to deposit of Rs. 100,000/- which is also not in public interest. In support of his contention he has relied upon Jan Muhammad v. Municipal Corporation, Faisalabad (1998 M LD 1151). Mr. Fowzi Zafar, A.A.G, submits that writ petition is not maintainable.
3. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the Learned counsel of the parties and perused the record myself. The petitioner has filed this writ petition in representative capacity as is evident from the contents of the writ petition and the prayer clause, It is settled principle of law that principles of CPC are applicable in Constitutional proceedings. The petitioner has filed this writ petition in violation of the mandatory provisions of Order I, Rule 8, CPC. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed as per principle laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Anjuman-e- Arayan Bhera v. Abdul Rashid (PLD 1973 Lah. 500). Our Constitution is based on trichotomy as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Zia- ur-Rehman's case (PLD 1973 S.C. 49).
This Court has only power to interpret the law and has no jurisdiction to take the role of policy- maker in the garb of interpretation therefore, writ petition is liable to be dismissed as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Zamir Ahmad Khan's case (1978 SCM R 327). The action of the respondents appears to be in public interest. Instead of dealing 7 different persons it is easy to deal with one person for smooth running, it is also in public interest to direct the contended bidder to deposit Rs. 100,000/- for testing his bona fide. It is pertinent to mention here that lease in question were not leased out for the last year. Therefore, the period mentioned in the advertisement is not prejudicing rights of any person which is in fact prescribed by the policy- maker in the public interest. The judgment cited by the Learned counsel of the petitioner is distinguished on facts and law. Keeping in view the aforesaid special circumstances of this case I am not inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner as the petitioner does not approach this Court with clean hands, as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Nawabzada Raunaq Ali's case (PLD 1973 S.C. 236).
In view of what has been discussed above, this writ petition has no merit and the same is dismissed.