1993 PLP 2213 (CLC)

I have not given any resignation. I am still an elected leader and willing to represent my area to work for the welfare of people living in Karachi and Sindh. I have worked with Afaq Ahmed, Amir Khan, Mansoor Bhai and Badar Iqbal and I found them better. In this difficult and hard period I have decided to work for the cause of Mohajirs and solution of their problems instead of working for an individual." . Meanwhile, the family of Mr. Munir including his brother, brother‑in- law and others showed their ignorance about his whereabouts. However, the family has not lodged any report of kidnapping with any police station of the city." On 28‑11‑1992 the following notification was issued by the Acting Speaker: "Under Article 64 read with Article 127 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Mr. Muhammad Afzal Munir MPA has resigned his seat from Constituency PS‑89 Karachi (S) V. Thereupon, the seat has become vacant with effect from 27th June, 1992." The resignation letter, on the basis whereof the said notification dated 28‑11‑1992 was issued by the Acting Speaker, is dated 27‑6‑1992. If the B petitioner had not resigned and the notification had been issued by the Acting Speaker as late as 28‑11_1992, the petitioner, being a free agent and no longer m hiding with effect from 10‑9‑1992, could easily have written a letter or sent a communication to or met the Acting Speaker informing him that he had not resigned and his 'resignation" should not be given effect to. Admittedly, the petitioner did not write any letter to the Acting Speaker the competent authority, nor met him. He became aware of the notification immediately after 28‑11‑1992 but took no action and filed this petition on 27‑12‑1992. Even after issuance of the notification dated 28‑11‑1992, the petitioner did not contact the Acting Speaker. Mr. Anwar Mansoor Khan is mainly relying on two newspapers' reports. First is the statement alleged to have been made by the petitioner and reported in `Dawn' of 11‑9‑1992,. reproduced earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner wanted the Court to rely only on one paragraph in the aforesaid news report in which the petitioner inter alia stated that he had not given any resignation and he was still an elected leader. However, if reliance is placed on the said news report, the statement is to be read in the context of the report published which shows that the petitioner had allegedly been kidnapped a day earlier alongwith his wife and was produced at a press conference for barely five minutes to declare his allegiance to another group of MQM. In the said news report, .it is stated that the petitioner came at the press conference, read a four‑paragraph statement written in Urdu, shook hands with newsmen and, without answering any questions left the venue. If the entire news report is to be believed, it would appear that the said statement, if made, was not a voluntary statement. In any case, the said "four‑paragraph" statement stated to have been written in Urdu and read by the petitioner at the said press conference on 10‑9‑1992 has neither been filed nor relied upon by the petitioner. Another news report of daily `NEWS' dated 20‑9‑1992, filed as Annexure C/7 to the memo. of petition refers to the surfacing of the petitioner, his kidnapping and forcing him to change his loyalty. It is stated in the said news report as follows: "Mr. Munir is reported to have suffered serious nervous breakdown after his abduction and coercion to change his loyalties." If learned counsel wants to rely upon the said newspaper's report, the same goes against the stand now taken that the petitioner had not resigned. The clear impression one gets by reading the said newspaper's report filed alongwith memo of petition by the petitioner himself is that the said statement on 10‑9‑1992 had been obtained under coercion from him. In any case, if he had not resigned he had just to inform the Acting Speaker but admittedly this was not done. Another newspaper report in `NAWA‑I‑WAQT' of 21‑9‑1992, relied upon by learned counsel is Annexure C/8. Reliance was placed by Mr. Anwar Mansoor Khan on the statement alleged to have been made by Mr. Qaim Ali Shah, leader of the Opposition in the Sindh Assembly that though on 28‑6‑1992, the petitioner had tendered his resignation but now his statement published on 11‑9‑1992 is to the effect that he had not resigned. As observed, the copy of the written "four‑paragraph" statement, stated to have been read by the petitioner in his press conference on 10‑9‑1992 has not been filed nor relied upon by the petitioner. Then if the petitioner had not resigned and notification about his seat, if any, falling vacant had not been issued by the Acting Speaker, and the petitioner considered himself to be an elected member, he could have attended the Sessions of the Sindh Assembly which admittedly he did not. Other newspaper's reports about the statement made by the petitioner, copies where have been filed alongwith memo. of petition and apparently relied upon by the petitioner show that the said statement had been made after the petitioner and his wife had been allegedly kidnapped and that after making of the statements, the petitioner had suffered a nervous breakdown and then he had gone to perform `UMRAH', from where he returned in early December, 1992. All these reports are against the stand now taken by the petitioner that he had voluntarily resiled from his resignation. In any case, as observed, the petitioner himself according to his own case, was a free agent with effect from 10‑9‑1992 and since then he made no effort to contact the Acting Speaker to deny the genuineness of his resignation. In fact no communication was made by the petitioner with the Acting Speaker after he surfaced on 10‑9‑1992. The upshot of the above analysis is that the case now set up by the petitioner that he had never resigned is an afterthought. As soon as he became a free agent, he should have contacted the Acting Speaker or sent a communication regarding his resignation which was not done. In the circumstances, we find no merit in this petition which is dismissed. It may be observed that he learned Advocate‑General had opposed this petition. H.B.T./M‑1829/K Petition dismissed.