2010 PLP 1665 (MLD)

CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioners Nos.1 to 9 are employed in the office of District Collector, Islamabad in various grades with different designations. Petitioners Nos. 10 to 39 are employed in the same office in grade 1 to 10 with different designations.

2. That respondent No.1 launched a Housing Scheme in Sector G-14, Zone-1, Islamabad and invited applications for allotment of plots. The petitioners Nos. 1 to 9 were entitled under Category-IV (BS 11 to 15) while the petitioners Nos. 10 to 39 were entitled in Category-V (BS-1 to 10).

3. That the criteria for the allotment of plots is mentioned in para. No.2 of terms and conditions. The allotment is to be made according to the age-wise seniority and the entitlement is to be determined by the respondent No.1.

4. That the respondents have acted in gross violation of the terms and conditions and have reportedly allotted plots provisionally to those who do not fall within para. 4.2(ii) and much junior to the petitioners.

5. That the petitioners have fundamental rights which are protected under Article 9 of the Constitution and are being deprived of the shelter, as the foundation has itself described as a basic human need of life like food and clothing.

6. The petitioners seek indulgence of this Court that respondent be directed to strictly proceed in accordance with the terms and conditions of brochure and allot plots to employees of the office of District Collector, Islamabad keeping in view age-wise seniority.

7. That respondents were summoned who submitted their parawise comments. Para. No.4 of the comments is reproduced as under: "A question was raised whether the plaints from the employees of these bodies should be attended by the Housing Foundation/ Executive Committee. After a detailed discussion it was decided that all plaints from the employees of these bodies addressed to the Housing Foundation should be referred to the concerned institution for attending the plaints and redressal of grievance. The Committee further recommended that each organization be advised to circulate the offer of plots ad final merit lists amongst its employees for obtaining objections if any. Such objections must be considered and settled before final list is recommended to the Housing Foundation for allotment of plots. Even those organizations whose employees have been allotted plots provisionally be advised to review keeping in view the objections, if received subsequently. However, in case the grievance is not attended and prima facie merit/criteria is violated, the Executive Committee may examine the matter." Para No.6 of parawise comments submitted by respondents Nos.2 and 3 is reproduced as under: "That para. No.6 is correct to the extent that respondent No.1 had written U.O. letter No.F.11(25)/2004-HF/E.IV, dated 9-10-2004 to the Chief Commissioner, ICT (exercising the powers of Board of Revenue) stating that a separate quota of 53 plots in different categories was kept for ICT in Phase-IV of the Housing Scheme. The Chief Commissioner, Islamabad was requested by FGEHF to communicate a list of selected applicants. Hence, the Chief Commissioner, Islamabad, upon recommendation of a Sub-Committee comprising Deputy Commissioner, Islamabad and Deputy Director (Administration) of Chief Commissioner's Office; approved a list of such applicants which was forwarded to FGEHF vide Chief Commissioner's Office letter No.1(2)-Rev Branch/CC/2005 dated 31 January, 2005. It may however be submitted that at preliminary stage, the Sub-Committee had made two lists of applicants, firstly of those officers/officials who had directly contributed in the land acquisition process in G-14/1, 2 and 3 for FGEHF and secondly all other officers/officials who had played no role in that process. It may not be out of place to mention that the dates of birth of three officers who remained posted as Assistant Commissioner (Saddar)/District Collector, Islamabad during the land acquisition process i.e. Mr. Asad Ullah Faiz, Mr. Saeed Ramzan and Mr. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal are 20-3-1970, 7-2-1971 and 15-3-1970 respectively. It is obvious that they are young in age but their names had to be included because of their active participation in the land acquisition process."

8. The respondents have violated their brochure and terms and conditions and also discriminated with the petitioners, therefore, writ petition be allowed, respondents be directed to strictly proceed in accordance with the terms and conditions of brochure and allot plots to the employees of the office of District Collector, Islamabad in accordance with age-wise seniority.

9. On the other hand; learned counsel for the respondents have vehemently opposed the writ petition and has defended their policy.

10. When confronted with para No.6 of parawise comments, learned counsel for the respondents have stated that Mr. Asad Ullah Faiz, Mr. Saeed Ramzan and Mr. Muhammad Zafar lqbal were allotted plots while relaxing the rules because of their valuable services rendered towards the acquisition process.

11. Arguments heard. Record perused.

12. The brochure attached with the writ petition reveals that rule 4.2 has been framed for the professionals which has been provided as under:-- "Professionals:--These shall include (i) Judges of Civil Courts Islamabad. (ii) Employees of Office of the District Collector, Islamabad. (iii) Employees of Housing Foundation. (iv) Law Officers of the Federation posted in the High Court Rawalpindi Bench and Supreme Court, Islamabad. (v) Members of the Islamabad District Courts Bar Association. While Rule 1.1 provides the allotment of plots to various categories of applicants which is reproduced as under:- "The available residential plots shall be allotted amongst various categories of applicants who fulfil the criteria of eligibility as below: (a) Employees of Federal Ministries/Divisions/Attached departments and their subordinate officers(declared as such and included in the Rules of Business), Members of Regularly constituted groups/services of the Federal Government and Members of Superior Judiciary i.e. Judges of Supreme Court, High Courts and Federal Shariat Court who were in service on 15-11-2003. 75% (b) Employees of Autonomous/Semi Autonomous Government Organization and Public Sector Corporations under the Administrative Control of Federal Government who were in the service on 15-11-2003. 8% (c) Employees of Constitutional Bodies/Professions. 5% (d) Retired Federal Government Employees of Ministries/Divisions/ Attached Departments and Subordinate Offices. 5% (e) Widows of those eligible Federal Government Employees (of Ministries/Divisions and Attached Departments and Subordinate offices) who died during service. 2% (f) Journalists. 3% (g) Federal Government Employees with major disability. 1% (h) Extremely hardship cases who fulfil the laid down criteria of hardship. 1%

13. The criteria for the allotment of plots rests on the basis of age wise seniority that the plots in the scheme would be allotted to the persons keeping in view the date of birth of applicants and first of all the senior most will be allotted the plots. Para No.6 of parawise comments submitted by respondents Nos. 2 and 3 is a glaring violation of rules/regulations set forth in the body of brochure. The contention of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 that Mr. Asad Ullah Faiz, Mr. Saeed Ramzan and Mr. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal who are young in age but their names had been included because of their active participation in the land acquisition process is misconceived. The above persons are government servants who are paid for their job and law does net recognize that persons who are involved in the process of land acquisition, they must be allotted land in lieu of their services rendered in acquisition of land. The action of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 is neither healthy nor in accordance with law rather it will create an ugly precedents in future.

14. As a result of above discussion, this writ petition is allowed, respondents are directed' to re-examine the cases of those allottees who have been allotted plots against the merit. Disposed of. A.R.K./M-414/L Petition accepted.