2010 PLP 664 (YLR)

HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.

This writ petition is filed with the prayer that "while accepting this writ petition, it be declared that the respondent No.3 cannot become the member of A.P.C.A. nor can hold any office of A.P.C.A., especially the Central Chairman being non-member of A.P.C.A. Pakistan and an officer working in BPS-17, consequently, all acts, deeds nominations, representations and actions taken by and on behalf of respondent No.3 may be declared as illegal, unlawful, arbitrary self-styled, mala fide, against the Constitution of all Pakistan Clerks Association (A.P.C.A), without any lawful authority and of no consequence. It is further prayed that the respondents Nos.2 and 3 may be directed to take legal action against the respondent No.3, who is illegally taking part in the activities of A.P.C.A. Pakistan while posing showing and representing to be Central Chairman of A.P.C.A. Pakistan. It is further prayed that till the pendency of writ petition, the respondent No.3 may be restrained from interfering in the legal activities of A.P.C.A., in any manner whatsoever."

2. Petitioner No.1 argued the case at length and submits that respondent No.3 is an Officer of Grade-17, cannot interfere in the petitioners' union but with ulterior motive and mala fide intention he has divided the petitioners' union in league with the Government Authorities, which has caused a serious prejudice to the petitioners. Further submits that against the conduct of respondent No.3 the petitioners have moved before the Chief Secretary Government of the Punjab but their request is not considered rather respondent No.3 is allowed to continue with his misdeeds.

3. The learned Additional Advocate-General, Punjab submits that the Government has no concern at all with the dispute of petitioners and respondent No.3 and this is just an allegation levelled by the petitioners that some Government functionary is supporting respondent No.3.

4. The learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that petitioners are habitual litigants, the petitioners have levelled false allegations against respondent No.3, factually the petitioners are blackmailers and are not entitled for any relief.

5. Arguments heard; record perused.

6. To my mind the present controversy revolves around some factual controversies, which cannot be resolved through the course of writ. On one hand the petitioners are making allegations against respondent No.3, on the other hand, the respondent No.3 also levelling serious allegations against the petitioners, the Government of the Punjab has categorically states that the Government functionaries are not concerned with the dispute amongst the petitioners and respondent No.3, thus in these circumstances I am of the considered view that the jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 cannot be exercised. The writ petition which otherwise is a discretionary relief is declined. H.B.T./M-841/L Petition dismissed.