2006 PLP 1749 (YLR)
Chaudhary LIAQAT ALI and 8 others — Petitioners Versus Mian MASOOD AHMED SHAHID and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1749 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Karamat Nazir Bhandari, J |
| Parties | Chaudhary LIAQAT ALI and 8 others — Petitioners Versus Mian MASOOD AHMED SHAHID and 3 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act (XXXV of 1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1749 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act (XXXV of 1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1749 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Karamat Nazir Bhandari, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1749 (YLR) (Chaudhary LIAQAT ALI and 8 others — Petitioners Versus Mian MASOOD AHMED SHAHID and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Riasat Ali for Petitioners.
- Muhammad Amin Lone, A.A.-G. on call with Muhammad Akbar Bhatti, Secretary, Punjab Bar Council for Respondents.
- 2. Petitioners Nos.8 and 9 are fresh entrants and after their enrolment as Advocates by the Punjab Bar Council on 13-12-2000, applied to the District Bar Association Toba Tek Singh for Membership-inclusion of names in the voters list. The names were not included for the same reason, i.e. the preliminary list of voters was prepared on 7-12-2000. Against this, these petitioners approached the Punjab Bar Council and a learned Member of the Executive Committee of the Bar Council, sitting alone, on 23-12-2000, allowed the application and directed the President of Toba Tek Singh Bar Association to include the names of the petitioners in the eligible voters list on payment of the dues by the petitioners. This order was challenged before the Pakistan Bar Council. The Chairman Appeal Committee, while admitting the appeal on 4-1-2001, suspended the operation of the impugned order. These two petitioners have joined in this petition to call in question the validity of the appellate order of the Pakistan Bar Council.
- 4. In the case of petitioners Nos.1 to 7, it has been argued that the orders for inclusion of the names of these petitioners in the voter list have been passed by the committee of five members and the President of the Bar cannot refuse to implement the same. This argument would have been accepted provided that these petitioners were the members of the Toba Tek Singh Bar. In their applications to the Punjab Bar Council they themselves say that they have applied for membership. Right of vote .is confined to members and cannot be exercised by outsiders. Until these petitioners have been formally admitted to the membership of the Bar, these petitioners cannot lay claim to be included in the voters list. In order to show that petitioners automatically become members since they applied, learned counsel for petitioners relied upon rule 7.10 of the Punjab Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1974.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 56
Punjab Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules 1974, R. 4.11
Pakistan Bar Council Appeal Rules, 1986, Rr. 3 & 4
Punjab Rules of Business of Bar Associations Memorandum of Association 1981, R.45
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Voters list
Petitioners applications for enrolment as members of Bar Association and inclusion of their names in the voters list was not accepted by the Bar Association on the ground that eligible voters list had already been declared by the President Bar Association
Petitioners challenged the matter before Punjab Bar Council
Single member of Executive Committee in case of two petitioners, had allowed the application and had directed the President of concerned Bar Association to include their names in the voters list and five members of the Executive Committee in case of other five applicants had issued the same direction
Such directions were challenged in appeal before the Pakistan Bar Council
Appeal Committee suspended the orders of Punjab Bar Council
Powers of Executive Committee exercised by single member was not legal and illegal order was rightly suspended by the Chairman Appeal Committee of Pakistan Bar Council
Other Petitioners had applied for membership in the Bar Association, as non-member has no right to vote
Member could not request to have his name included in eligible voters list
Pakistan Bar Council had exercised powers legally within its jurisdiction
Order was interim and constitutional petition against interlocutory order was generally not permissible
Petition was dismissed in limine in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J.
Petitioners Nos.1 to 7 claiming to be members of different District Bar Associations, applied to the District Bar Associations Toba Tek Singh for Membership and for being included in the voters list for the elections which are scheduled to be held on 13-1-2001. The application for inclusion in voters list does not seem to have been accepted on the ground that as per directions of the Executive Committee of the Punjab Bar Council, the list has been prepared on 7-12-2000. It seems thereafter these petitioners applied to the Punjab Bar Council for enrolment as voters. This application was allowed at preliminary stage on 5-1-2001. As in spite of it the names have not been placed on the voters list, these petitioners have filed this constitutional petition.
2. Petitioners Nos.8 and 9 are fresh entrants and after their enrolment as Advocates by the Punjab Bar Council on 13-12-2000, applied to the District Bar Association Toba Tek Singh for Membership-inclusion of names in the voters list. The names were not included for the same reason, i.e. the preliminary list of voters was prepared on 7-12-2000. Against this, these petitioners approached the Punjab Bar Council and a learned Member of the Executive Committee of the Bar Council, sitting alone, on 23-12-2000, allowed the application and directed the President of Toba Tek Singh Bar Association to include the names of the petitioners in the eligible voters list on payment of the dues by the petitioners. This order was challenged before the Pakistan Bar Council. The Chairman Appeal Committee, while admitting the appeal on 4-1-2001, suspended the operation of the impugned order. These two petitioners have joined in this petition to call in question the validity of the appellate order of the Pakistan Bar Council.
3. During the course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioners Nos.8 and 9 candidly admitted that the powers of the Punjab Bar Council can be exercised by the Executive Committee and not by a single Member, sitting alone. The order dated 23-12-2000 being without jurisdiction, has rightly been suspended by the Pakistan Bar Council. Further Pakistan Bar Council is seized of the matter. Filing of writ petition against interlocutory order is generally, not permissible and such a petition is maintainable only in cases of apparent lack of jurisdiction. It has not been contended that Pakistan Bar Council has no jurisdiction in the matter. To the extent of these two petitioners, therefore, this petition is dismissed in limine.
4. In the case of petitioners Nos.1 to 7, it has been argued that the orders for inclusion of the names of these petitioners in the voter list have been passed by the committee of five members and the President of the Bar cannot refuse to implement the same. This argument would have been accepted provided that these petitioners were the members of the Toba Tek Singh Bar. In their applications to the Punjab Bar Council they themselves say that they have applied for membership. Right of vote .is confined to members and cannot be exercised by outsiders. Until these petitioners have been formally admitted to the membership of the Bar, these petitioners cannot lay claim to be included in the voters list. In order to show that petitioners automatically become members since they applied, learned counsel for petitioners relied upon rule 7.10 of the Punjab Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1974.
5. I am afraid, this rule does not bear the interpretation placed upon the same by the learned counsel. The rule presupposes the existence of membership .in more than one District Bar Association and only enables the persons to file declaration indicating the choice of the Bar Association in which they will be voting. As the petitioners have still not obtained the members of the Bar Association, they cannot claim for inclusion in the voters list. The petition has to be rejected insofar as these petitioners are also concerned.
6. Dismissed in limine. M.I./L-104/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.