1994 PLP 574 (CLC)

Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Khan is a Civil Judge I‑Class, posted at Pakpattan, and asserts his entitlement to have official accommodation, earmarked for Grade 18 Officers.' Construction of two houses of the said category is said to have been completed in December, 1992. As is pleaded, in a meeting of the Judicial Officers, including the D&SJ, the then D.C. allowed this officer to occupy one of these two houses, and he started paying rent from December, 1992 onwards. Subsequently, on 1‑2‑1993, the same house was allotted to the District Attorney and the Civil Judge was asked to vacate. Such orders are said to have been passed behind the back of the petitioner, and even to the ignorance of the D&SJ, on 9‑12‑1992, with a view to show undue favour to the Law Officer and to make the Civil Judge realise that he was going to have a discriminatory and derogatory treatment at the hands of the Executive, and in order to make the people‑at‑large know that even the Judicial Head had no say in the matter.

2. The District Attorney is said to have been transferred. The other house built for a grade 18 officer is stated to be in occupation of the Colony Assistant. Actually, for the Colony Assistant, there has been in existence another very good house, which is presently in occupation of the Assistant Commissioner. The said officer, it is urged, cannot be given preference over a Civil Judge, who too is a Government Officer and a senior Judicial Officer. Particularly when he had been inducted into the premises, on the tacit approval' of the D.C. and the D&SJ, it would be too much, if he is now asked to quit.

3. These are the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Without, however, venturing to enter upon scrutiny of the same, or making a determination whether the same are tenable, as also available to the Officer for invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, it may be mentioned that the learned Addl. Advocate‑General has held out an assurance that he would get in touch with the D.C. and prevail upon him to objectively consider the entitlement of the officer to have an official house, commensurate with his status, and to permit him to continue in possession of the one, he has already occupied. It is expected that such a minor matter would be sorted out, at the local level, by the Deputy Commissioner and the District and Sessions Judge, in a formal meeting, and it may not require a final verdict by this Court on the merits of the matter.

4. I, however, feel that in the context of the case it will not be out of place to observe that the arbitrariness exercised in the matter of allotment of official residences to executive officers, as against judicial officers, constitutes neither a salutary practice, nor even a permissible course. A Magistrate, an A.C., an A.D.C., even an A.C. or EA.C. under training, finds a house reserved for him before even his arrival at the new place of posting, and a Judicial Officer has to wait for months and years and, more often than not, he is transferred further, before his turn comes. At a certain place, there were as many as ten official houses, all in occupation of the Officers of the Executive, new‑comers and new entrants including, and there was a single Addl. D&SJ, but he did not get a house throughout his stay, and was obliged to have a small house on rent in an isolated colony of poor people. Attitude of the Executive Head of the District towards the housing problems of that senior Judicial Officer was that of complete and callous indifference; rather there was a manifest disinclination, a clear refusal on the part of the D.C. to accommodate the poor AD&SJ in an official house, although even Superintendent of his office was occupying one of such houses. Is it indeed not lamentable ? Is there no quota? Is there no committee? I am not aware of the Rules. Apparently, it seems, the Deputy Commissioners and Commissioners have monopolised and have been exercising self‑assumed authority in the matter. Judiciary ought to have representation, and it must not suffer neglect on that score. In fact all departments should have a share in the `pool', if owing to financial stringencies every Government Department cannot have a housing colony of its own.

5. The District Judge should endeavour to find out ways and means to have for his officers reasonable and respectable representation respecting official accommodation. Age‑old practice, being unconscionable and unfair, must not be adhered to Rules on the subject, like Rules of all categories, must be realistic; if not, the same must now be rationalized. Learned District and Sessions Judge would study the Rules and undertake an exercise how to streamline the same. He will. address the High Court and the Government or the subject. .

6. This discussion has, at long last driven me to derive that there is little room for an apologetic approach for an attitude of withdrawal, and the Civil Judge must get an equally honourable treatment in the matter. If he is ignored, or is shabbily dealt with, in the matter of his entitlement to official accommodation, in accord with his status, vis‑a‑vis executive officers of equal status, it would certainly amount to discrimination, which this Court will not approve of, invoking its inherent jurisdiction. If this Court has been interfering in exercise of its authority available under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, in ensuring fairplay in the matter of fresh recruitments and to see that even the humblest job in the State set‑up does not go to an undeserving candidate, and merit must not be ignored in any walk of public life, and it‑ has been interfering in such matters, on a wide scale, official acts in the sphere in question, if arbitrary and wanton, unfair and ulterior, may also be struck down. Why should despotism be permitted to prevail anywhere?

7. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations; and a copy of this order shall be communicated to the D&SJ as also to the D.C. for information and compliance. . AA./Z‑98/L Order accordingly