2021 PLP 224 (YLR)

MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.

Through the instant writ petition the petitioners have sought declaration of the notification dated 21.6.2018 and 23.4.2019 as illegal, unwarranted and against the fundamental rights of the petitioners. The prayer clause of the writ petition is reproduced as under:- In the light of the above stated facts it is very humbly prayed that:-- a. The proscription order issued by respondent No. 3 vide impugned notification No. SO(L&O) 24/2016 (S.IV) dated 21.4.2018 and the impugned retention notification No.SO(L&O) 24/2016 (S.IV) dated 23.4.2019 may kindly be set aside by declaring same to be void, illegal, ex parte, without jurisdiction, against the law and procedure and against the fundamental rights of petitioners. b. That the contempt of Court proceedings may kindly be initiated against the respondents for violation of orders of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.Ps. Nos. 132/2018 and 220/2018. c. Any other remedy which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be granted to the petitioners to meet the ends of justice.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that at the time of disposal of Writ Petition No. 132/2018 dated 04.03.2019, the learned Deputy Attorney General made a categorical statement at bar that the names of the members of the bar and the petitioners have been deleted from the list of 4th schedule and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly. Per learned counsel as reflected in the impugned notifications contrary to the statement of learned Deputy Attorney General the names of the petitioners have again been included in the list of 4th schedule, which is not only illegal but also amounts to gravest kind of contempt of Court.

3. The learned Dy. Attorney General is not in attendance, however Dy. Advocate General is present on his behalf.

4. As evident from the order passed in Writ Petition No. 132/2018 dated 4.3.2019, which were dictated in open Court in presence of learned Advocate General and on a categorical statement of learned Advocate General, which reads as under:- "Today this petition was fixed for arguments but at the outset of proceedings the learned Advocate General appeared before the Court and stated at bar that the names of petitioners have been deleted from the list of persons whose names were placed in the list of fourth schedule. 2. in view of the above statement of learned advocate General Gilgit-Baltistan this petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly."

5. We are at pain to observe that again the names of two petitioners namely Raja Mir Nawaz and Inayat-ur-Rahman have been included in the list of 4th schedule at serial Nos. 32 and 27 respectively, while name of one Yawar Ali (non petitioner) in Writ Petition No. 132/2018 have been shown at Serial No. 33 of the impugned notification.

6. When an undertaking is given in the Court, the deviation there from amounts to gravest kind of the contempt of Court. The respondents should take care of the orders passed by this Court.

7. In view of above discussion the names of the petitioners Inayat-ur-Rahman (S.No. 27), Mir Nawaz Mir (S.No.32) and Yawar Ali (S.No.33) are deleted from the list of the impugned notification dated 23.4.2019. The petitioners have been warned in open Court to mend their way and this Judgment/order will not provide them blanket immunity for future.

8. A copy of this judgment be sent to Government of Gilgit-Baltistan, Department of Home and Prisons G.B. Civil Servant Gilgit for information/ compliance. SA/132/GB Order accordingly.