Find a Lawyer

MIAN SHABIR ASMAIL versus CHIEF MINISTER OF PUNJAB

r Article 199 High Constitutional Jurisdiction - Nature, jurisdiction and prerequisites for public interest litigation petitions \\\ Public interest litigation "These groups and interests Attempts to provide legal representation to those represented or subjected to them. Representation in the legal process involves not only the poor and the underprivileged but also the common citizen \\\ public interest litigation - an innovative strategy. Which has been created over the years to provide easy access to justice to the weaker sections of humanity. It is a powerful tool in the hands of the public, motivated individuals and social action groups to fight injustice and pursue backward sections of society for their social and economic privilege \\\ public interest litigation. In the interests of the mass it is a legal action or an action initiated for the protection or enforcement of r. At a public level it is quite different from the traditional litigation in public, which is primarily a contradiction. There is a dispute between the parties to the litigation, making one claim or suing the other. And that opposes such claims or withholds such relief does not bring public interest litigation against the other for the purpose of enforcing the rights of another person, as is common law litigation. I do, but it is aimed at promoting and defying the public interest, demanding that a large number of constitutional or legal rights be violated. Of the people who are poor

P L D 2017 Lahore 597 

Before Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, C J

Mian SHABIR ASMAIL—Petitioner versus

CHIEF MINISTER OF PUNJAB and others—Respondents

Writ Petition No.9156 of 2017, heard on 20th April, 2017.

(a) Constitution of Pakistan—

—Art. 199—Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court—Public interest litigation—Nature, scope and precondition for petition pertaining to Public Interest Litigation. "Public interest litigation” is an effort to provide legal representation to groups and interests that have been unrepresented or under-represented in the legal process. These include not only the poor and the disadvantaged but ordinary citizens. "Public interest litigation" is an innovative strategy which has been evolved over the years for providing easy access to justice to the weaker sections of the humanity and is a powerful tool in the hands of public, spirited individuals and social action groups for combating exploitation and injustice and securing for the underprivileged segments of society their social and economic entitlements. "Public interest litigation" is, therefore, in the interest of public at large. It is a legal action or proceeding initiated for the protection or enforcement of the rights of public at large. It is totally different from the traditional litigation which is essentially of adversary character, where there is a dispute between two litigating parties, one making claim or seeking relief against the other and that other opposing such claim or resisting such relief. Public interest litigation is brought before the court not for the purpose of enforcing the rights of one individual against another, as happens in ordinary litigation, but it is intended to promote and vindicate public interest, it demands that violation of constitutional or legal rights of large number of people who are poor, ignorant or in a socially or economically disadvantaged position should not go unnoticed and un-redressed.

"Public interest litigation" is essentially a cooperative or collaborative effort on the part of the petitioner, the State or public authority and the Court to secure observance of the constitutional or legal rights, benefits and privileges "conferred upon the vulnerable sections of the community and to provide social justice to them. Then a court entertains public interest litigation, it does not do so in a caviling spirit or in a confrontational mood or with a view of tilting an executive authority or seeking to usurp it, but its attempt is only to ensure observance of social and economic rescue programmes, legislative as well as executive, framed for the benefit of the have-nots and the handicapped and to protect them against violation of their basic human rights, which is also the constitutional obligation of the executive. The court thus merely assists in realization of the constitutional obligations. Such sacrosanct public spiritedness fÓrm;s the foundation of public interest litigation.

It is, therefore, a precondition that any public interest litigation is grounded in bona fide public interest, the Courts do not allow, that the corridors of justice are polluted by vested interest or unscrpulous litigants. The Court must, therefore, be satisfied regarding the credentials of the petitioner, the prima facie correctness of the infÓrm;ation placed before the Court, the specific and definite nature of the infÓrm;ation and seriousness of the pleadings. The court must distinguish between the public interest litigation and a publicity interest Jitigation or private interest litigation or politics interest litigation.

Public interest litigation should not be allowed to become a deal to settle personal vendetta or to wreak vengeance or to malign any party or to bring anybody into disrepute with baseless allegations. There must be at all times, real and genuine public interest involved in the litigation and credible infÓrm;ation for maintaining a cause before the court. Public interest litigation should not be mere adventure or an attempt to carryout fishing expedition to settle personal scores, [p. 602] B

V.G. Ramachandran's Law of Writs, Sixth Edition Volume-I Pp-961-966, 969 and 1000-1001 and Dr. B. Singh v. Union of India AIR 2004 SC 1923 rel.

(b) Constitution of Pakistan—

—Art. 199—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss,35 & 35-.A—Punjab Public Procurement Rules, 2014, Preamble—Constitutional jurisdiction of high Court—Public interest litigation—Abuse of process of public interest litigation—Imposition of special costs on such petitioner— Public procurement—Public Policy—Scope—Petitioner, impugned procurement of police unifÓrm;s by the Provincial Government and police Force, inter alia, on the ground that the same was a violation of public procurement taws—Validity—Perusal of the record, in the present case, revealed that the tender for the procurement was done strictly in accordance with the Punjab Procurement Rules, 2014 and no Specific violation of law was pointed out by petitioner—Introduction of new police unifÓrm;s was a policy issue and did not call for interference by the High Court under Art. 199 of the Constitution—High Court observed that there had been no serious effort made by the petitioner to verify whether contract for such procurement was in accordance with the Punjab Public Procurement Rules, 2014 and that such petitions brought a bad name to public interest litigation and lowered credibility of the same in the eyes of the Court and such practice was therefore strongly deprecated—High Court further observed that the petitioner had not only abused the process of public interest litigation but also burdened the Court and drawn upon its time and resources, besides, eating into the time allocated for other cases—Constitutional petition was dismissed, with imposition of special costs of Rupees Ten Thousand on petitioner, accordingly. [pp. 601, 603J A, C & D

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Chief Secretary Peshawar and others v. Hayat Hussian and others 2016 SCMR 1021; Kawas B. Aga and another v. City District Government, Karachi (CDGK) through Nazim-e-Ala and others PLD 2010 Kar. 182; The Postmaster-General, Northern Punjab and (AJ&K), Rawalpindi v. Muhammad Bashir and 2 others 1998 SCMR 2386; Inyatullah v. Sh. Muhammad Yousaf and 19 others 1997 SCMR 1020 and M.D. Tahir, Advocate v. Federal Government and others PLD 1999 Lah. 409 rel.

Abdullah Malik, M. Rizwan Gujjar, S. Parveen Mughal and Hafza Mafia for Petitioner.

Anwaar Hussain and Ahmad Hassan Khan, Assistant Advocaes-General Punjab for Respondents.

Imtiaz Rashid Siddiqi, Shehryar Kasuri and Raza Imtiaz for Respondent No.9.

Kamran Adil, AIG (Legal), Hman Rihts Cell.

Rana Ilyas, AIG (Legal), Punjab.

Saleem Chughtai, Muhammad Imtiaz Ali and Asif Ali Sheikh, DSPs. (Legal).

Date of hearing: 20th April, 2017.

law firms from Silanwala lawyer