1998 PLP 2331 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE DISTRICT COUNCIL, RAWALPINDI through Administrator/Chief Officer
| Citation | 1998 PLP 2331 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Zia Mahmood Mirza, Raja Afrasiab Khan and Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE DISTRICT COUNCIL, RAWALPINDI through Administrator/Chief Officer |
| Primary Law | Punjab Local Councils (Lease) Rules, 1990‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 2331 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Local Councils (Lease) Rules, 1990‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 2331 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Zia Mahmood Mirza, Raja Afrasiab Khan and Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 2331 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE DISTRICT COUNCIL, RAWALPINDI through Administrator/Chief Officer). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nasir Saeed Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 10th October, 1995
- Nasir Saeed Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 28‑8‑1995 passed by the learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Writ Petition No.933 of 1995). ‑‑‑‑R. 7‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Auction of lease for collection of Goods Exit Tax‑‑‑Petitioner's bid, though highest, was rejected and re-auction was ordered‑‑‑Petitioner's Constitutional petition before High Court against rejection of his bid was rejected‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑During course of hearing the Court was informed that in re‑auction highest bid received was much more than the bid offered by petitioner‑‑‑Supreme Court in order to satisfy itself about genuineness of re‑auction and bona fides of highest bidder, directed Administrator of Zila Council to proceed with confirmation proceedings in accordance with law and on his confirmation bidder would be required to deposit 1/10th of his bid money within three days of confirmation as provided in R. 7, Punjab Local Councils (Lease) Rules, 1990 and also to deposit first monthly instalment‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was adjourned to a future date for further proceedings.
Judgment & Decree
ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.
Zila Council, Rawalpindi auctioned the lease for collection of Goods Exit Tax for the year 1995-96. Auction was held on 10-7-1995 in which the petitioner, amongst others, participated and gave the highest bid of Rs.4,21,00,000 but it was not accepted by the Deputy Commissioner/Administrator who finding it inadequate ordered re-auction. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner approached the High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction but with no better result as the learned Judge in the High Court found that the bid of the petitioner was rejected after due consideration and re- auction has been ordered in public interest, in which the petitioner is free to participate. Still dissatisfied, petitioner has filed a petition for leave to appeal in this Court. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel appearing for the District Council/caveator, at considerable length. It has transpired during the course of hearing that in the re-auction held on 12-9-1995, the highest bid received was received Rs.7,31,00,000 as against the previous bid of the petitioner for Rs.4,21,00,
000. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, inter alia, contended that the re-auction was held in violation of the stay order issued by this Court and the highest bid given therein was bogus and fictitious which was manoeuvred to damage the case of the petitioner pending in this Court. In order to satisfy ourselves about the genuineness of the re-auction and the bona fides of the highest bidder therein, we direct the Administrator of the respondent Zila Council to proceed with the confirmation proceedings in accordance with law and if he confirms the highest bid, the bidder may be asked to deposit 1/10th of his bid money within three days of the confirmation as provided in rule 7, Punjab Local Councils (Lease) Rules, 1990, and also to deposit the first monthly instalment. Petition for leave to appeal is being adjourned for the time being, to 18-10-1995 for further proceedings. A.A./M-140/S Order accordingly.