Advocacy's fee | The legal advisers made a constitutional plea that the Municipal Corporation pay them dues and advocacy fees, on which the respondent took the stand that their appointments were not made in accordance with the rules. Directed. 2024 C L C 325




The legal advisers made a constitutional plea that the Municipal Corporation pay them dues and advocacy fees, on which the respondent took the stand that their appointments were not made in accordance with the rules. Directed.

2024 C L C 325



درخواست (پٹیشن):
محمد اظہر عباسی اور مسعود احمد عباسی نے ہائی کورٹ میں ایک آئینی درخواست دائر کی، جس میں انہوں نے میونسپل کارپوریشن سے درخواست کی کہ انہیں بقایاجات اور موجودہ ایڈوکیسی فیس کی ادائیگی کی جائے۔ ان کا مؤقف تھا کہ انہیں قانونی مشیر کے طور پر مقرر کیا گیا تھا اور وہ اس حیثیت میں خدمات انجام دیتے رہے ہیں، مگر ان کی خدمات کے عوض فیس کی ادائیگی نہیں کی گئی۔

جواب (Respondents’ Stance):
جواب دہندہ، یعنی میونسپل کارپوریشن کے ایڈمنسٹریٹر اور محکمہ قانون کے سیکرٹری نے یہ مؤقف اختیار کیا کہ کوئی بھی محکمہ یا ادارہ بغیر مناسب طریقہ کار کے کسی نجی وکیل کی خدمات حاصل نہیں کر سکتا۔ انہوں نے یہ بھی کہا کہ اگر کسی افسر نے کسی وکیل کی تقرری کی ہے تو وہ افسر خود اس کی پیشہ ورانہ فیس ادا کرنے کا ذمہ دار ہوگا اور اس کے خلاف تادیبی کارروائی بھی کی جائے گی۔ انہوں نے واضح کیا کہ درخواست گزاروں کی تقرریاں تقریباً دو سال پہلے ختم ہو چکی تھیں اور انہیں باقاعدہ طور پر توسیع نہیں دی گئی تھی۔

کوٹ کا فیصلہ:
ہائی کورٹ نے یہ فیصلہ دیا کہ درخواست گزاروں کی تقرریاں پنجاب مقامی حکومت (قانونی مشیر) قواعد، 2003 کے تحت مقرر کردہ طریقہ کار کی خلاف ورزی کرتے ہوئے کی گئی تھیں۔ عدالت نے یہ بھی کہا کہ درخواست گزاروں کے پاس تقرری کا کوئی قانونی حق نہیں تھا، کیونکہ ان کی تقرریاں صرف نامزدگی یا سفارش کے طور پر تھیں اور ان کی تقرری کا عمل صحیح طریقے سے مکمل نہیں ہوا۔ اس لیے عدالت نے درخواست مسترد کر دی اور متعلقہ محکمے کو ہدایت کی کہ وہ ایڈمنسٹریٹر (میونسپل کارپوریشن) کے خلاف تادیبی کارروائی شروع کرے، جس نے درخواست گزاروں کی تقرری بغیر مناسب طریقہ کار کے کی تھی۔





2024 C L C 325

[Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)]

Before Jawad Hassan, J

MUHAMMAD AZHAR ABBASI AND MASOOD AHMAD ABBASI---Petitioners

Versus

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION and others----Respondents

Writ Petition No.3222 of 2021, heard on 11th September, 2023.

(a) Punjab Local Government (Legal Advisers) Rules, 2003---

----R.4---Legal adviser of Local Government on regular basis, appointment of---Procedure---Under Rule 4(1) of the Punjab Local Governments (Legal Advisers) Rules, 2003 ('the Rules'), a local government desirous to engage a legal adviser on regular basis shall invite applications through advertisement at least in two national daily newspapers indicating the requisite qualifications, experience, standing of the advocate and minimum remuneration offered, while under R.4(2) of the Rules the candidates are advised to address their applications to the local government concerned and also forward a copy thereof along with annexures to the Government as defined under R.2(b) of the Rules which means the Government of the Punjab in the Law and Parliamentary Affairs Department---In terms of R. 4(3) of the Rules, the local government as defined under R.2(c) of the Rules shall forward to Government all applications of the candidates along with its recommendations which are placed before the Selection Committee constituted under R. 4(4) of the Rules---Rule 4(5) of the Rules provides that the committee shall approve the name of advocate to be appointed as legal adviser and the remuneration to be paid to him and the said approved advocate by the committee is appointed by the local government concerned on the terms and conditions fixed by the Government.

(b) Punjab Local Government (Legal Advisers) Rules, 2003---

----R. 4---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 4 & 5---Legal adviser of Local Government on regular basis, appointment of---Procedure, non-observance of---Right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law, but subject to obedience to the Constitution and law---Scope and effect---Petitioners (practicing advocates) invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court with prayer that the respondents (Administrator Municipal Corporation ) be directed to pay arrear as well as current retainership/professional fee to them---Stance of the respondent (Secretary Law and Parliamentary Affairs Department)was that no department/body could engage a private advocate without due procedure and in case, an officer had appointed any private advocate, such officer shall be responsible to pay the professional fee from his own pocket and shall also be liable to disciplinary action as per law---Validity ---Admittedly, the appointments of the petitioners had already ended almost two years ago and the same were not formally extended by the authority---Two letters, on the basis of which the petitioners were claiming to be the appointees, as well as other documents revealed that the respondent (Municipal Corporation) invited applications in terms of R. 4(1) of the Punjab Local Government (Legal Advisers) Rules, 2003 ('the Rules') and forwarded the same along with recommendations as per R. 4(3) of the Rules but said recommendations were required to be placed before the Selection Committee in terms of R. 4(4) of the Rules for approval as per R. 4(5)---Pertinently, the respondent (Municipal Corporation) appointed the petitioners at its own without following the procedure provided under the Rules and getting approval from the Competent Authority while he was well aware of the instructions contained in relevant letter (of the year 2016) followed by instructions (issued in the year 2018) issued by the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Law and Parliamentary Department---Article 4 of the Constitution guaranteed right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law, but at the same pedestal Art. 5(2) thereof required obedience to the Constitution and law, being the inviolable obligation of every citizen---Record revealed that the petitioners were not ever appointed in due course of law and the letters relied upon by them to establish their alleged appointment at the most might be taken up as only nomination/recommendation for relevant job---When a law described or required a thing to be done in a particular manner, it should be done in that manner or not at all---Recommendation or nomination for appointment did not create any vested right until it had been done through proper procedure/mechanism provided under the law which, admittedly in the present case, had not been adopted---High Court passed instruction to the concerned department to initiate disciplinary actions against the respondent (Municipal Corporation Administrator) for giving appointments to the petitioners of his own without following the procedure provided under Punjab Local Governments (Legal Advisers) Rules, 2003---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

       Muhammad Akbar v. Federation of Pakistan, Ministry of Law and Justice (Justice Division), Islamabad through Secretary and another 1996 SCMR 1017; Nazir A. Khan Swati v. Ministry of Law and Justice and others 1998 PLC (C.S) 372; Hadayat Ullah and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others 2022 SCMR 1991 and Attaullah Khan v. Ali Azam Afridi and others 2023 PLC (C.S) 182 ref.

       Petitioner in person.

       Ch. Sarfraz Ahmad Chadhar for Respondents Nos.1 and 2.

       Malik Amjad Ali, Additional Advocate General for Respondent No.3 with Abid Aziz, Assistant Advocate General.

       Malik Muhammad Siddique Awan, Additional Attorney General with Arshad Mehmood Malik, Assistant Attorney General.

 






For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.


  













 



 







































 































Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Property ki taqseem ,Warasat main warson ka hisa

Punishment for violation of section 144 crpc | dafa 144 in Pakistan means,kia hai , khalaf warzi per kitni punishment hu gi،kab or kese lagai ja ja sakti hai.

Bachon ki custody of minors after divorce or separation