1980 PLP 857 (CLC)

Special Public Prosecutor not appointed as Government Pleader by Provincial Government, held, cannot act as recognized agent of Provincial Government. Mehr Ghulam Ali Mubashar for Petitioner. This revision petition is directed against an order of the District Judge, Jhelum, whereby he dismissed an appeal filed by the petitioner, namely, the Punjab Province.

2. The appeal was filed by the petitioner through the Deputy Director, Mineral Development, Jhelum, through Ch. Muhammad Anwar Advocate, in the capacity of Special Public Prosecutor. It was objected by the respondent, Malik Shahbaz Khan that the appeal was not properly instituted inasmuch the Deputy Director, Mineral Development was not authorised by means of a general or special order to file the appeal on behalf of the Punjab Province and that the Special Public Prosecutor was not a Government Pleader and, therefore, he could not act as Govern ment Pleader. These objections were sustained by the learned District Judge, with the result that the appeal was dismissed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Deputy Director, Mineral Development was acquainted with the facts of the case and therefore, he was competent to file the appeal on behalf of the Pro vince of the Punjab. In this connection he relied on the provisions of rule 1 of Order XXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure. He, however, conceded that no general or special order of the Provincial Government authorising the said .Deputy Director to 61e the appeal had been placed on the record of the learned appellate Court.

4. Rule I referred to above reads thus : -o- "In any suit by or against the Government, the plaint or written statement shall be signed by such person as the Government may by general or special order, appoint in this behalf and shall be verified by any person whom the Government may so appoint and who is acquainted with the facts of the case." A plain reading of this rule would show that it is not anybody acquainted with the facts of the case who can file a suit on behalf of the Government. Besides being so, he has got to be a person appointed by general or special order to file the suit on behalf of the Government. There is no such order in favour of the Deputy Director, Mineral Development. A Therefore, even if he was acquainted with the facts of the case h was not authorised to file the appeal on behalf of the Government. It no disputed that the provision of rule I relating to suits shall apply mutates mutandis to appeals by virtue of section 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned District Judge was, therefore, right in taking the view that the appeal had not been filed by a duly authorised person.

5. As for the other ground on which the petitioner's appeal was thrown out, namely, that the Special Public Prosecutor could not act as Government Pleader, it is not the plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Special Public Prosecutor was also appointed a Government Pleader and as such he could file the appeal in question on behalf of the Province of the Punjab. No exception can, therefore, be taken to the observation of the learned District Judge that the Special Public Prosecutor could not act as recognised agent of the Province of ~he Punjab in relation to the appeal before him.

5. There is, thus, no merit in this revision. It is, therefore, dismissed in limine. M. A. K. Revision dismissed.