2008 PLP 297 (CLC)
ABDUS SATTAR CHUGHTAI MALIK, ADVOCATE — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN BAR COUNCIL and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 297 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUS SATTAR CHUGHTAI MALIK, ADVOCATE — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN BAR COUNCIL and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989, (b) Constitution of Pakistan (973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 297 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989, (b) Constitution of Pakistan (973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 297 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 297 (CLC) (ABDUS SATTAR CHUGHTAI MALIK, ADVOCATE — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN BAR COUNCIL and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ABDUS SATTAR CHUGHTAI MALIK, ADVOCATE----Petitioner
- ----Rr. 8, 9 & 12---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Vires of amendment of R.9(a) of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989---Petitioner, an Advocate of Supreme Court had assailed amendment of R.9(a) of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989 in respect of reduction of the tenure qua the Supreme Court Bar Association from two years to one year approved by the Association and had prayed that such reduction of tenure be declared without lawful authority---Validity---Besides the objection as to the locus standi of the petitioner who was neither an office-bearer nor member of the Executive Committee of the Association, it was worth noting that none of the incumbent office-bearers or members of the Executive Committee had felt aggrieved of said amendment in the Rules---Membership of Association was 1580 who hailed from all over the country and only the petitioner had sought to assail the existing position---Not only number of elections had taken place thereafter, even the petitioner might have participated by casting his vote---Acceptability of such amendment of Rules was manifest from the fact that except the petitioner no one else had assailed the same---Terms could not be sought to be extended merely on the assumption that the successor would not be in a position to complete the agenda or carry out the developmental activity.
- SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.---Mr. Abdus Sattar Chughtai Malik, Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan, a Member of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan has filed this petition praying that "petition in hand may please be accepted, consequently amendment of Rule 9(a) in respect of reduction of the tenure qua the Supreme Court Bar Association from two years to one year approved by the Association vide Meeting dated 28-2-2003 (Annexure "A") may kindly be declared illegal, unlawful and inoperative, resultantly Notice of the meeting dated 27-9-2006 (Annexure "C") may also be declared without lawful authority and be set aside in the interest of justice". Such a prayer has been made on his plea and view of the matter that the amendment carried out in the Rules viz., Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989 whereby the term of the Executive Committee and Office-Bearers was reduced to one year from two years was not consistent with the rules inasmuch as that no due notice was given nor any agenda was issued for such purpose and that even the quorum requirement was not met. It is pleaded in the petition that "Tenure of the association is very material in order to achieve objects thereof", and that the "Age of one year for such association is ridiculously low and deficient for performing its obligations with its ultimate goals". He has also highlighted the achievements of the current Executive Committee and Office-Bearers as follows:---
- 3. Besides the objection as to the locus standi of the petitioner who is neither an Office Bearer nor Member of the Executive Committee, it is worth noting that none of the incumbent Office Bearer or Member of the Executive Committee have felt aggrieved of such an amendment in the rules. I have been told that the membership of the association is presently 1580, who hail from all over the country and only the petitioner seeks to assail the same which is in existence since 4th of July 2003. Not only number of elections have taken place thereafter even the petitioner might have participated by casting vote. The acceptability of such amendment of rules is manifest from the fact that none-else than the petitioner has assailed the same. One of the Members of the Executive Committee (Rana A. Hameed Talib, Advocate) had filed a petition of the nature but withdrew the same and the petition was dismissed on 18-9-2006 accordingly. All members of the Supreme Court Bar Association are advocates of the apex Court who have attained such a status after practicing law for substantially long period and experience. I cannot assume that they would have overlooked or ignored the rules prescribing procedure for amendment as provided by Rule 43. Indeed except assertion in the petition no data/sufficient material has been placed on record, even to infer that compliance of rules was not made at the time of amendment. It is well known that writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised merely on assumptions.
Headnotes / Summary
Rr. 8, 9 & 12
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Vires of amendment of R.9(a) of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989
Petitioner, an Advocate of Supreme Court had assailed amendment of R.9(a) of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989 in respect of reduction of the tenure qua the Supreme Court Bar Association from two years to one year approved by the Association and had prayed that such reduction of tenure be declared without lawful authority
Besides the objection as to the locus standi of the petitioner who was neither an office-bearer nor member of the Executive Committee of the Association, it was worth noting that none of the incumbent office-bearers or members of the Executive Committee had felt aggrieved of said amendment in the Rules
Membership of Association was 1580 who hailed from all over the country and only the petitioner had sought to assail the existing position
Not only number of elections had taken place thereafter, even the petitioner might have participated by casting his vote
Acceptability of such amendment of Rules was manifest from the fact that except the petitioner no one else had assailed the same
Terms could not be sought to be extended merely on the assumption that the successor would not be in a position to complete the agenda or carry out the developmental activity.
Art. 199
Scope
Constitutional jurisdiction could not be exercised merely on assumptions.
Judgment & Decree
SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.
Mr. Abdus Sattar Chughtai Malik, Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan, a Member of Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan has filed this petition praying that "petition in hand may please be accepted, consequently amendment of Rule 9(a) in respect of reduction of the tenure qua the Supreme Court Bar Association from two years to one year approved by the Association vide Meeting dated 28-2-2003 (Annexure "A") may kindly be declared illegal, unlawful and inoperative, resultantly Notice of the meeting dated 27-9-2006 (Annexure "C") may also be declared without lawful authority and be set aside in the interest of justice". Such a prayer has been made on his plea and view of the matter that the amendment carried out in the Rules viz., Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan Rules, 1989 whereby the term of the Executive Committee and Office-Bearers was reduced to one year from two years was not consistent with the rules inasmuch as that no due notice was given nor any agenda was issued for such purpose and that even the quorum requirement was not met. It is pleaded in the petition that "Tenure of the association is very material in order to achieve objects thereof", and that the "Age of one year for such association is ridiculously low and deficient for performing its obligations with its ultimate goals". He has also highlighted the achievements of the current Executive Committee and Office-Bearers as follows:
"Needless to say that sitting association first time in its history scaled number of welfare goals, details thereof may burden the petition with heavy list. It may be appreciated that allotment of 12 Kanals plot situated in the Constitutional Avenue may remain useless unless, construction of the building of Bar Association is achieved by the sitting association so is the case of allocation of the colonies for the Supreme Court Lawyers in their working areas."
2. Though the case was still at initial/motion stage yet Mr. Ali Akbar Qureshi Secretary Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan who was asked to 'produce the rules and Mr. Zaka-ur-Rehman, Vice President (Punjab), Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan have entered appearance who state that the amendment so made in the Rules i.e. Rules 8 9 and 12 serve the best interest of the members inasmuch as that it enables and ensures the Members belonging to all Provinces an opportunity of representation through a democratic process of election. It is also pointed out by them that office bearers of all the Bar Associations in the country have term of one year. They have also challenged the locus standi of the petitioner to raise this issue through this petition particularly when the election program of the forthcoming election has already been issued on 12-9-2006.
3. Besides the objection as to the locus standi of the petitioner who is neither an Office Bearer nor Member of the Executive Committee, it is worth noting that none of the incumbent Office Bearer or Member of the Executive Committee have felt aggrieved of such an amendment in the rules. I have been told that the membership of the association is presently 1580, who hail from all over the country and only the petitioner seeks to assail the same which is in existence since 4th of July 2003. Not only number of elections have taken place thereafter even the petitioner might have participated by casting vote. The acceptability of such amendment of rules is manifest from the fact that none-else than the petitioner has assailed the same. One of the Members of the Executive Committee (Rana A. Hameed Talib, Advocate) had filed a petition of the nature but withdrew the same and the petition was dismissed on 18-9-2006 accordingly. All members of the Supreme Court Bar Association are advocates of the apex Court who have attained such a status after practicing law for substantially long period and experience. I cannot assume that they would have overlooked or ignored the rules prescribing procedure for amendment as provided by Rule
43. Indeed except assertion in the petition no data/sufficient material has been placed on record, even to infer that compliance of rules was not made at the time of amendment. It is well known that writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised merely on assumptions. So far as the contention of the learned counsel that Office Bearers and Executive Committee should have term of two years for completing their agenda and developmental program is concerned, suffice it to observe that for all elected offices including Associations like the Supreme Court Bat Association, the Members of Senate, National Assembly and Provincial Assemblies even have their terms of office fixed by the relevant laws. The term cannot sought to be extended merely on the assumption that the successor would not be in a position to complete the agenda or carry out the developmental activity. In view of the above, I find no merit in this petition which is dismissed accordingly. H.B.T./A-238/L Petition dismissed.