1994 PLP 272 (CLC)

‑‑‑‑S. 15‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Selection of Chairman and Members of Zakat and Ushr Committee‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑No suit or proceeding of any kind was competent against any act done in good faith or intended to be done under Zakat and Ushr (Organization) Ordinance, 1979 or any rule framed thereunder, and such an act could not be called in question in any Court‑‑‑No injunction could be granted and no proceedings could be entertained in relation to anything done under the Zakat and Ushr (Organization) Ordinance, 1979‑‑‑Proceedings under the Ordinance, thus essentially have their own exclusive sphere and were not intended to be made subject‑matter of scrutiny in Courts‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction has to be confined within its limited scope‑‑‑No interference was called for in circumstances. Masud Ahmad Dogar for Petitioners. Ch. Abdul Ghani for Respondents. The petitioner has challenged the selection of Chairman and Members of Ushr and Zakat Committee of Chak No. 158‑W.B., Tehsil Dunyapur, District Lodhran, on the ground that the same has been secured through fraudulent means by respondents Nos. 2 to

8. At least 3 persons have sworn and submitted affidavits that they were not present in the gathering shown to have been convened in the village mosque at 1 p.m. on 17‑3‑1993, with 67 men and 22 women: They are Noor Karim, Allah Ditta and Bashir Ahmad.

2. The appeal lies to the District Ushr and Zakat Committee. Such an appeal was filed and was rejected on 14‑7‑1993, particularly as it was barred by the law of limitation. It has been observed that Bashir Ahmad, Chairman of the Committee, respondent No.2, is a graduate and a school teacher, and has no partisan character. He was not even aspirant for the office. People have full faith in him, as he enjoys good reputation as a citizen and has a blotless conduct.

3. Actually, under the provisions of Zakat and Ushr (Organization) Ordinance, 1979 (section 15) no suit or proceeding of any kind is competent against any act done in good faith or intended to be done under the Ordinance or any rule framed thereunder, and such an act cannot be called in question in any Court. No injunction can be granted, and no proceedings can be entertained in relation to anything done under the Ordinance. Thus the proceedings under the Ordinance essentially have their own exclusive sphere and are not intended to be made subject‑matter of scrutiny in Courts. Writ jurisdiction obviously have to be exercised by this Court in' no aimless and indulgent manner but has to be confined within its limited scope. I do not think that any interference by this Court in the matter is called for. Dismissed. AA./N‑180/L Petition dismissed,