Complaint against maladministration

2013 PTD 486 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss.9 & 10Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Constitutional petitionJurisdiction, functions and powers of the Federal Tax OmbudsmanComplaint against maladministrationAggrieved personScope

Petitioner while performing his duties as Additional Collector (Preventive) Customs made order for release of a vehicle, which was later rescinded when the case was reopened by another officer

Subsequently, the owner of the vehicle made complaint of maladministration against the other officer before the Federal Tax Ombudsman, who dismissed the same but along with the dismissal, also made recommendations for removal of the petitioner from service on grounds of maladministration

Contention of the petitioner was that the impugned recommendations were coram non judice and illegal as no complaint was filed against the petitioner in respect of his order-in-original

Validity

No complaint of maladministration against petitioner was filed by an aggrieved person nor any reference against the petitioner by the President, Senate or National Assembly was made, in the present case

Neither any motion of the Supreme Court nor of a High Court was made during the course of any proceedings and no proceedings of the Federal Tax Ombudsman's own motion against the petitioner were initiated by the Federal Tax Ombudsman in the present case as was evident from the impugned order

Federal Tax Ombudsman while making recommendations against the petitioner had failed to follow the procedure under S.10 of the Establishment of the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 as no notice was issued to the petitioner nor any opportunity was provided to him before making the impugned recommendations, which negated the principles of natural justice

Federal Tax Ombudsman had also failed to record any findings against the petitioner to the effect that as to how and what maladministration had been committed by him and in absence of such findings, recommendations made by the Federal Tax Ombudsman could be of no legal effect

Recommendations made by the Federal Tax Ombudsman against the petitioner were, thus, coram non judice, without jurisdiction and of no legal effect; and were accordingly set aside

High Court further declared that departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner in compliance to the recommendations of the Federal Tax Ombudsman, were equally illegal

Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.