P L D 2022 High Court (AJK) 25 (PLP)

SADAQAT HUSSAIN RAJA, C J.

Through the above titled writ petitions filed under Article 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974, similar following relief is solicited by the petitioners in both the above titled writ petitions:- "It is, therefore, very humbly prayed that by accepting the instant writ petition, the order of respondent No.1 No.17640-42 dated 19.11.2020 may kindly be quashed/set aside to the extent of the petitioner as against the law on the subject and against the golden principle of Audi Alteram Partem totally based on malice and discrimination. Any other relief which the petitioner is entitled, may kindly be granted in the interest of justice." As common questions of fact and law are involved in both the above titled writ petitions, hence, were heard together and decided as such through this single judgment. Brief history of the case is that the petitioners claimed themselves to be 1st Class State Subjects of Azad Jammu and Kashmir as refugees settled in Pakistan. It is stated that the petitioners filed an application before Election Commission of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for enrolment as voters in Constituency No. LA 41 Valley 06 with ID Cards, State Subject Certificates and other proofs have also been provided to the Election Commission of Azad Jammu and Kashmir in support of their applications. It is contended that the petitioners' application was in process, Ahsan Naseem and Mr. Majid Khan (respondent No.2 in both the writ petitions) filed an application against the petitioners before the competent authority. The competent authority without conducting proper inquiry through order dated 19.11.2020 cancelled the State Subject Certificates of the petitioners, hence, the instant writ petitions. The writ petitions have been resisted by the respondents by filing written statement, wherein the claim of the petitioners has been negated and prayed for dismissal of the instant writ petitions. The learned counsel for the parties reiterated the facts and grounds as taken in the writ petitions as well as written statement, therefore, there is no need to reproduce the same. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record carefully. The scrutiny of the record reveals that the petitioners moved applications before the competent authority for entering their names in the voter lists. The record also postulates that respondent No.2 (in both the writ petitions) moved application by annexing the State Subject Certificates of the petitioners by alleging that all the State Subjects are fake and fabricated. The Election Commission of Azad Jammu and Kashmir under due process of law, sent the aforesaid applications along with State Subject Certificates to District Magistrate Muzaffarabad for investigation regarding genuineness of the State Subject Certificates. Respondent No. 1 (District Magistrate Muzaffarabad) after due process of law, declared their State Subject Certificates as forged through impugned order dated 19.11.2020. I would like to reproduce the relevant portion of the aforesaid impugned order dated 19.11.2020, which is as under:- The scrutiny of the impugned State Subject Certificates show that all the certificates have been issued in different dates with same handwriting and pen, which make them suspicious. Prima facie, the aforesaid certificates have not been issued by the competent authority rather the same have been prepared by the State Subject holders fraudulently. The District Magistrate Muzaffarabad has to adopt the process for cancellation of those State Subject Certificates which have been illegally issued by the authority. In the instant case, the State Subject Certificates have not been issued by the concerned authority, hence, the process for cancellation of the illegal State Subject Certificates is not required. The authority categorically stated that the aforesaid certificates have not been issued from his office, therefore, authenticity and genuineness of the aforesaid documents has not been proved, hence, needs not for further probe. Even otherwise, the instant writ petitions have only been filed to protect the ill-gotten gains. The law does not allow the petitioners to protect their ill-gotten-gains by invoking writ jurisdiction. Similar point has been resolved by the apex Court in a case titled "Custodian of Evacuee Property and 7 others v. Tariq Mahmood Butt" [2001 YLR 3139], wherein it has been observed that:- "(b) Ill-gotten-gains

An aggrieved person is not permitted to invoke the writ jurisdiction for the perpetuation of injustice or to save his ill-gotten-gains

The respondent after having got the land at his own instance in lieu of the land allotted to him, cannot turn round and say that he was still entitled to receive the compensation of evacuee land which was allotted to him." In the light of what has been stated above, finding no force in the above titled writ petitions, therefore, the same stand dismissed with no order as to the costs. SA/11/HC(AJ&K) Petitions dismissed.