Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: HABIB-UL-WAHAB-AL KHAR1 VS Respondent: MIAN MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOO And Other
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Abdul Majeed Tiwana Title: HABIB-UL-WAHAB-AL KHAR1 vs MIAN MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOO And Other Case No.: Writ Petition No. 7459 of 1993 Date of Judgment:1993-09-19 Reported As: K.L.R. 1994 Civil Cases 28 Result: N/A
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT A. M. TIWANA, J.- On the following day of the recent dissolution of the Legislative Assemblies on 18.7.1993, there was an uproar in the National Pres that Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, the dethroned Chief Minister of the Punjab like his penultimate predecessor-in-office, Mian Nawaz Sharif, had, on the Las day of his rule, distributed a large number of residential plots to his relations cronies and political associates or their nominees. Since a bad tradition o misappropriating and dissipating valuable public property by the rulers in a rega fashion was taking its roots to the sheer detriment of the public at large particularly the have-nots for whose shelter various housing schemes hat primarily been formulated, this court, taking notice of the news items, vide it: order, dated 19.7.1993, asked the learned Advocate General, Punjab, to plact before it on 28.7. 1993, the details of all allotments of residential/commercia plots made by Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo during his tenure as Chief Ministe of the Punjab, to different persons in various development schemes in the Province. At the same time, the Press was also invited to participate in this exercise to help this court. Meanwhile an interim order was issued to the Heads of all official Development Agencies, restraining them from taking any further action on the allotment of plots made by Mr. Wattoo. 2. On 28.7.1993, the next date of hearing, Mr. Sarfraz Syed, Deputy Editor of 'Daily Khabrain' Lahore, of his own accord, put in appearance as a petitioner to peruse the news published in his newspaper and the learned Acting Advocate General, Punjab, placed before this court two lists of plots allotted
---
## Page 2
by Mr. Wattoo during his tenure as Chief Minister, Punjab. One of these lists, having been prepared by the Housing and Physical Department, contained the names of 85 allottees of different sizes of residential plots, and the other list comprised the details of 114 allottees in various development schemes of Lahore Development Authority. He, however, informed that Mr. Wattoo had withdrawn some of the allotment orders before implementation, excepting those of two widows and three Police Officers. Four other journalists, represented by Miss Asma Jehangir Advocate, also put in appearance, saying that their names had also figured in list of allottees of plots but they never requested the Chief Minister for their allotment, nor they were interested in retaining those plots. They were allowed to place their explanation on the record. Ch. Muhammad Wassi Zafar, an Advocate of Lahore High Court, made an application for becoming a party to the proceedings, on the ground that Mian Nawaz Sharif, during his chief-ministership of the Punjab, especially during the last week of his tenure from 28.7.1990 to 6.8.1990, had, by abusing his official position, allotted more than 5000 plots to his cronies and political associates to strengthen his political position and he wanted to assist this court in bringing on the record the details of his malpractices in this regard. His application was, however, dismissed summarily as a writ petitioner was already there. 3. Since sufficient material had come on the record, Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, the former Chief Minister of the Punjab, was directed to appear in this Court on 1.8.1993, either personally or through counsel, and to submit written statement as also to explain verbally, as under which law or authority did he allot residential plots of different sizes to various persons in different Housing Schemes in the Punjab? He was also asked to explain as for which extra ordinary performance did he grant cash award to the three police officers to the tune of lacs of rupees besides allotting them valuable residential plots of State land in Lahore? Notice was also directed to be issued to Mr. Habib-ur-Rehman, former SSP, Lahore; Major (Retd.) Muhammad Akram D.I.G. Lahore; and Mr. Ghulam Asghar Malik, former I.G.P, Punjab, for their appearance and showing cause as for which extra-ordinary performance they had received residential plots and cash award from Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, the Ex. Chief Minister of the Punjab, and whether the Police Rules or any other relevant law permitted them to receive and accept such monitary and material benefits? If not, why appropriate legal action should not be initiated against them, besides the confiscation of plots to the State and directing the refund of cash award to the Provincial exchequer? On their appearance, their case, which had taken some what different turn, was separated for the sake of convenience. 4. On 1.8.1993 Mr. Sarfraz Syed, Deputy Editor of 'Daily Khabrain' Lahore, again appeared as writ petitioner but now with his counsel Mr. Rashid Murtaza Qureshi, Advocate. Sardar Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate, put in appearance on behalf of Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, the Ex. Chief Minister: Dr. Khalid Ranjha, Advocate, alongwith the above mentioned three police officers; and Syed Tassadaq Hussain Jilani, Acting Advocate General, Punjab, alongwith A.R. Arshad Malik, Advocate/Legal Advisor, LDA, besides an officer of Housing Department, also appeared. On this date of hearing, Al- Jehad Trust, Rawalpindi, a registered body represented by Mr. Habib-ul-Wahab Al-Khari Advocate and Mr. Muhammad Salim Sheikh, Advocate, made an application for becoming party to these proceedings with a view to assist this Court. The application so made was accepted and Al-Jehad Trust, Rawalpindi, was made writ petitioner in place of Mr. Sarfraz Syed, Deputy Editor, 'Daily Khabrain', Lahore, who was transposed to the category of respondents because he was also found to have been allotted a plot by Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, Ex-Chief Minister of the Punjab, and his continuance as writ petitioner was not considered proper. 5. On the same date, on the suggestion of various newspapers for conducting probe about the
---
## Page 3
plots allotted by different Prime Ministers in Islamabad Capital Territory, it was decided to commence the probe from 30.12.1985, the day the Third Martial Law was lifted, so as to include the period of late Mr. Muhammad Khan Junejo, Ms. Benazir Bhutto, Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi and Mian Nawaz Sharif, who had been Prime Ministers since the aforesaid date till 18.7.1993, one after the other, and the Chairman, C.DA was directed to make available to this Court the list of allottees who had been allotted plots by different Prime Ministers from their discretionary quota. On the submission of the lists of plots by the C.DA, indicating the allotment of 129 State-owned plots by Late Mr. Muhammad Khan Junejo, 561 plots by Ms. Benazir Bhutto, 59 plots by Mr. Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi, and 23 plots by Mian Nawaz Sharif, during their respective tenures as Prime Ministers, the last three were issued notices to appear in this Court, either personally or through their counsel, and explain as under which law or authority they had allotted the said plots to different persons of their choice during their respective tenures? On their appearance through their counsel, their case was separated for the sake of convenience though the main question remained common with this writ petition. 6. On this very date of hearing, Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate for Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, Ex-Chief Minister of the Punjab, placed on the file the written statement of his client alongwith two lists of plots and their allottees, one containing the details of 1992 plots and the other of 463 plots allotted to different persons from the discretionary quota of the Chief Minister by Mian Nawaz Sharif and his successor Mr. Ghulam Haider Wyne as Chief Ministers of the Punjab. While doing so, he, in the first instance, raised preliminary objections against the maintainability of this writ petition for suo moto exercise of constitutional jurisdiction by this Court but at the same time he frankly stated that, as per instructions of his client, he was ready to waive all sorts of preliminary objections against its maintainability and his client (Mr. Wattoo) was willing to participate in this probe: provided this Court observed equality of all concerned before law, parity amongst all persons equally poised, and maintained consistency in judicial approach. Elaborating his contention, he submitted that his client was ready to face the enquiry on the question of allotments of plots as Chief Minister of the Punjab if his predecessors*in-office were also called upon to face the probe on the question of discretionary allotment of plots made by them during their respective tenures. 7. Some surprise was expressed by this court over the above contention of the learned counsel, demanding equality of treatment before this court between his client with his two predecessors- in-office. However, on the explanation of some background by him, he was assured by this court the equality of treatment to all concerned in the process of accountability and its consequences and he, waiving all technical objections against the maintainability of the writ petition, undertook to argue the case of his client only on merits. 8. So far as the contents of the written statement of Mr. Wattoo, embodying his defence on merits, are concerned, he claimed immunity from challenge his discretion as Chief Executive of the Province in allotting residential plots as the same was not regulated by the statutory rules but by many considerations which were not necessary to be recorded in writing. He urged that in the absence of statutory rules laying down the criteria for allotment of plots, he relied on precedents as also on his own clear conscience in making such allotments. He alleged that he had not allotted even a single plot to any MPA/MNA or to any other political personality during his tenure which was the most politically turbulent period in the Province, rather, he preferred to allot residential plots of various sizes to the widows of a poet, journalists, employees of different grades and some other deserving persons without deriving any personal benefit for himself. He explained that not a single
---
## Page 4
commercial plot was allotted to anybody, nor any such plot was converted into residential one, nor any rule was relaxed. He claimed that residential plots were available in his discretionary quota and their allotments were made strictly under the dictates of his conscience in favour of deserving persons. 9. Blaming his predecessors-in-office, for their arbitrary exercise of power in this respect, he, with reference to the list of plots (Annex-RI) attached to his written statement alleged that 1992 plots of over 10 marlas, measuring 1837 kanals, valuing Rs. 1837 millions were allotted by Mian Nawaz Sharif during his tenure as Chief Minister of the, Punjab which clearly smacked of his nepotism and favouritism for political consideration in violation of the allotment policy by relaxation of rules. According to him, Mr. Nawaz Sharif had on 6th August 1990,' the day the Provincial Assembly was dissolved, allotted 600 plots, each of an area of over 10 marlas, valuing about 600 millions to his favourites, mostly MNAs/MPAs, Senators, political leaders and other influential persons in order to gain political dividends. He alleged that his predecessors had been using the plots in LDA as an instrument for horse-trading in order to win over the political loyalties of some fair-weather polititions and while doing so they did not spare even public cites, and open spaces, meant for community centers, schools, power houses, hospitals etc. In different prestigious development schemes of LDA by allotting the same at a throw-away price of Rs. 90,000/- per kanal as against their market value ranging from Rs. 20 lacs to Rs. 50 lacs per kanal. In this category they allotted 66 kanals worth Rs. 136 millions, he added. 10. He asserted that commercial plots total measuring 102 kanals with the reserved price of Rs. 96,000/- per kanal, the market value whereof was Rs. 306 millions approximately, were allotted by his predecessors to influential persons, including political figures, for political gains. In this respect he quoted the example of Shan Arcade in Garden Town measuring about 5 kanals 7 marlas worth about Rs.40 millions and site No. 89-C-II in Gulberg-II, valuing Rs. 14 million approximately. 11. Giving the details of another category of plots, he alleged that exchange of plots was another lucrative business, entailing large profits to the allottees and causing huge losses to the LDA and a large number of plots of inferior quality were allowed to be exchanged by Mian Nawaz Sharif with plots of superior quality, especially by his political favourites, including exchange with commercial plots in Allama Iqbal Town and Garden Town. 12. Referring to another category of plots, he alleged that on the basis of forged and bogus PTDs/PTOs/RL-IIs his predecessors-in-office had allowed exemption/allotment in 463 cases covering an area of 325 kanals amounting to Rs. 650 millions. In this respect he asserted that Chaudhris of Gujrat and Sharifs of Model Town had been operating as property dealers and grabbed valuable plots of LDA in Garden Town, Allam Iqbal Town, Gulberg, Faisal Town, New Muslim Town and Model Town Extension. According to him, there was yet another form of dubious transactions of plots, quoting a specific example, he alleged that Brig. (Retd.) Manzoor Malik, a former Director General of LDA, during the regime of Mian Nawaz Sharif, had managed to get a valuable plot in the name of his wife Ms. Naveed Malik for the reserved price of Rs. 33,000/- only and later he sold it to one Haji Muhammad Ashraf for a sum of Rs. 48 lacs. 13. He suggested that various allegations made by him in the preceding paragraphs against his predecessors-in-office need to be probbed into ever since 1985 alongwith the allotments made by himself during his short tenure to enable them to prepare their defence, they were directed to be supplied the copies of written statement of Mr. Wattoo alongwith the copy of the lists of plots
---
## Page 5
appended thereto. 16. On 8,8.1993, besides the petitioner represented by Mr. Khairi Advocate, Sardar Latif Khan Khosa, Advocate for Mr. Wattoo, Acting Advocate General of the Punjab alongwith some officials of Housing Department and LDA, Mr. Maqbool Elahi Malik Advocate put in appearance on behalf of Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mr Ghulam Haider Wyne but he requested for adjournment for the submission of written statement on behalf of his clients. He was allowed adjournment till 19.8.1993. However, before adjourning the proceedings, an application made by Major Gen. (Retd.) M.H. Ansari, a former Director General of LDA, who had come of his own accord, to become party to these proceedings in order to help his court in this probe, was accepted and it was directed that his services would be availed of as a local commissioner/representative of this court, whenever necessary. 17. On 19.8.1993 Mr. Habib-ul-Wahab A1 Khairi, Advocate, representing Al-Jehad Trust, Rawalpindi, the writ petitioner herein, pressed into service bis amended writ petition already available on the record, indicating Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, Mr. Ghulam Haider Wyne and Mian Nawaz Sharif as the respondents, besides certain others, and they were directed to file written statements, if they so liked, till 25.8.1993, the next date of hearing. The learned Acting Advocate General placed on the record the lists of plots allotted by the Chief Ministers of the Punjab from their discretionary quota during the period from September 1985 to July 1993 in various schemes of Housing and Physical Planning Department and its development agencies such as LDA, FDA, MDA etc. According to the details so provided, 2597 plots were allotted in various schemes of Lahore Development Authority, 117 plots in those of Multan Development Authority, 28 plots in those of Rawalpindi Development Authority and 20 plots in those of Murree Improvement Trust. In the development schemes directly executed by Housing and physical Planning Department in different districts of the Punjab, 1808 plots were allotted and out of them 40 commercial plots were converted into residential ones. He subsequently provided details of 20 pieces of Slate land in the jurisdiction of Murree-Kahuta Development Authority leased out by the Board of Revenue after resuming the same from the Forest Department. 18. Since, as per details of plot provided by the learned Acting Advocate General of the Punjab, most of the plots had been allotted in various schemes of Lahore Development Authority and Mr. Wattoo had, in his written statement, also requested for the probe into the lists supplied by him therewith, Major Gen. (Retd.) M.H. Ansari was formally appointed as a local commissioner/court representative, without any fee, to find out- (i) as to how far the lists of plots supplied by the Lahore Development Authority are correct; (ii) how many such plots have been allotted in Lahore Development Authority in the names of fictitious/banamis and who are the real beneficiaries thereof and how much benefit they have derived; (iii) how many political personalities, especially the Ministers, M.NAs and M.P As, and high-placed Government officers of any department or official agency have obtained such plots in Lahore Development Authority in their own names or in the names of their relations, friends or associates, particularly those officers who have remained associated with this organization as Director Generals, Directors etc;
---
## Page 6
(iv) what was the approximate market value of each plot at the time of its allotment and what is its market value now-a-days; and (v) what is the present position of each plot i.e. Whether it is lying vacant, constructed or partly constructed and who is occupying it and in what capacity, whether the same has been transferred to some one else, if so, to whom and for what consideration? He was directed to submit his report within two weeks. 19. Mr. Maqbool Elahi Malik, Advocate, learned counsel for Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mr. Ghulam Haider Wyne, requested for yet another adjournment for the submission of written statement on behalf of his clients and it was acceded to. He eventually submitted written statement on 25.8.1993 but only on behalf of Mian Nawaz Sharif. In this written statement he raised preliminary objections concerning bar of jurisdiction including the one on account of the transactions past and closed. On merits he asserted that the plots allotted by him were available in the discretionary quota of Chief Minister and he rightly allotted the same to the deserving persons in exercise of the discretion vested in him which could not be made subject of enquiry. He alleged that the list (Annex. R1) provided by Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo alongwith his written statement required rechecking and it might necessitate better written statement. 20. Out of the three main respondents, namely, Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo, Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mr. Ghulam Haider Wyne, now before this Court, no argument has been addressed by Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa Advocate, the learned counsel for Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo respondent, probably for the reason that he had, from the very inception, waived all the preliminary objections, including that of the maintainability of this writ petition and jurisdiction of this Court. However, during the pendency of the writ petition he has occasionally been pointing out on different dates of hearing that his client had the jurisdiction to make allotments of plots to the deserving persons from his discretionary quota under the relevant rules in different Housing Schemes of the Housing and Physical Department of the Government of Punjab and its Development Agencies such as Lahore Development Authority (LDA), Multan Development Authority (MDA), Faisalabad Development Authority (FDA) etc., and while doing so he compared his client with his predecessors-in-office and asserted that he was extremely cautious, did not give any plot to any political personality, and the size of most of the plots allotted by him varied from three marlas to five marlas each, which were given to really poor persons to enable them to built shelter for themselves. 21. The learned Acting Advocate General of the Punjab, who alongwith Mr. A.R. Arshad Malik, Advocate, the Legal Advisor of Lahore Development Authority, besides representing the Provincial Government, also represents the LDA, has pointed out that the orders passed by Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo for the allotment of plots in the Development Schemes directly formulated, executed and supervised by the Housing and Physical Department of the Government of Punjab in different districts of the Province, including 15 plots of one kanal each allotted in the Housing Scheme of Murree Improvement Trust, were in fact never implemented by the concerned Agencies on account of the stay order issued by this Court. According to him, out of plots allotted by Mr. Wattoo in various Schemes of LDA, all plots of over 10 marlas, excepting 6 plots of 1 kanal each (out of which 2 were allotted to two widows and remaining 4 to four Police Officers), were cancelled by himself before vacating the office. Since Mr. Khosa Advocate has not put in appearance today, it is not possible to ascertain the reason as to why his client had, before vacating the office of the Chief
---
## Page 7
Minister, cancelled plots of 10 marlas or more in area and neither the leamed Acting Advocate General nor Mr. A.R. Arshad Malik, Advocate, the Legal Advisor of LDA, is aware of the reason therefor. Anyhow, the present position is that out of many plots of various sizes allotted by Mr. Wattoo from his discretionary quota in various Development Schemes in the Province, 6 plots, each measuring 1 kanal is M.A. Jouhar Town and 86 plots, each measuring 3 to 5 marlas, in certain other Schemes of LDA, total being 92 plots, stand allotted to different persons. 22. It may be mentioned here that though the matter regarding the allotment of 4 plots to three Police Officers, (namely, Mr. Ghulam Asghar Malik, former I.G.P. Punjab, who was allotted two plots of 1 kanal each; Major (Retd.) Muhammad Akram, former DIG Lahore and Haji Habib-ur-Rehman, former SSP Lahore, who were allotted 1 plot of 1 kanal each) in M.A. Jouhar Town Scheme, Lahore, for their alleged meritorious service during the difficult days of Mr. Waltoo's regime, was separated in the form of Writ Petition No. 8624 of 1993 and proceedings in that writ petition, as verbally informed by Dr. Khalid Ranjh'a, their Advocate, were stayed by a Division Bench of High Court in an I.CA filed by them, yet the question of competency of Mr. Wattoo to allot plots to them still remains sub judice herein and it has to be determined in this writ petition by this court. This question shall be decided alongwith the question of similar competency of his predecessors-in-office. 23. Now 1 take up the question of jurisdiction of this court coupled with the maintainability of this writ petition. Mr. Maqbool Ellahi Malik, the learned Advocate for Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mr. Ghulam Haider Wyne respondents, who also has the support of Mr. Tassadaq Hussain Jillani, the learned Acting Advocate General of the Punjab, has vehemently contended that so far there has been no judicial precedent of any superior court in this country, enabling a Judge of the High Court to assume suo moto juisdiction in respect of any matter coming to his knowledge or notice through a Press report, especially when the present respondents, as in this case, have been the holders of highest constitutional and political office in the Province as its Chief Executives which office by itself affords protection to their acts done in the performance of their ordinary duties and functions in managing its day to day affairs. Elaborating his contentions, he has, with reference to Article 184(3) and Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Constitution), submitted that there is a vast difference between the powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) ibid and those of the High Court under Article 199 supra inasmuch as there is no condition precedent for the exercise of a writ jurisdiction by the Supreme Court that it must have an aggrieved person before it but for the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction under Article 19l( supra, there has to be an aggrieved person before the High Court but in the instant case there was no such person before this court when it commenced proceedings on the Press report. In support of his…
Read the unabridged text and precedent citation network on Al Wakeelo Legal Research Platform.