Stereo. H C J D A 38.
Judgment Sheet
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
JUDGMENT
M/S Alzair Travel & Tours etc.
VERSUS
Federation of Pakistan etc.
Date of hearing: 14.07.2014, 11.07.2014, 07.07.2014, 04.07.2014,
30.06.2014, 27.06.2014, 26.06.2014.
Petitioner by:
M/S Muhammad Azhar Siddique, S.S. Paracaha,
M. Irfan, Muneer Ahmad and Shabbir Ismail,
Advocates.
Respondent by:
M/S Muhammad Javed Kasuri and Nasar Ahmad,
Deputy Attorney Generals for Pakistan.
M/S Muzamil Akhtar Shabir and Muqtedir Akhtar
Shabir, Advocates for Competition Commission of
Pakistan.
M/S Aitezaz Ahsan and Farhan Shahzad,
Advocates for HOAP.
Saeed Ahmad Malik, Director Hajj, Lahore in
person.
-----------------------------------
Muhammad Khalid Mehmood Khan, J. The petitioners are
the private limited companies registered under the Companies
Ordinance, 1984 and are engaged in the business of Hajj/Umra as tour
operators. All the petitioners are registered with the respondent No.2
as well.
2.
In the earlier round of litigation, the matter was finally decided
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Dossani
Travels Pvt. Ltd. and others versus Messrs Travels Shop (Pvt.) Ltd.
and others (PLD 2014 Supreme Court 1). The Hon’ble Supreme
Court of Pakistan while setting-aside the judgment of this Court has
held that it is not the function of the High Court to exercise
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
2
jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution for interfering in the
policy making domain of the Executive, the High Court is bound to
follow the principle of trichotomy of powers being foundational
principle of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan however opined that the High
Court under Article 199 of the Constitution can annul an order or a
policy framed by the Executive, if it is violative of the Constitution,
law or is product of mala fides. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of
Pakistan further directed the Ministry of Religious Affairs,
Government of Pakistan as under:(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
3.
The Hajj Policy should be framed, announced and
placed on the website of MORA preferably within
six weeks of the arrival of last flight of Hajis from
KSA under intimation to the Registrar of this
Court. This of course would be subject to any
policy decision of the Saudi Government regarding
allocation of Hajj quota for Pakistan;
The Hajj Policy should be framed by a Committee
headed by the Secretary, Ministry of Religious
Affairs (MORA); a nominee of the Competition
Commission of Pakistan; a nominee of the
Secretary,
Ministry
of
Foreign
Affairs,
Government of Pakistan; a nominee of the
Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Division
and Parliamentary Affairs; and a nominee of the
Attorney General for Pakistan;
The credentials of each applicant/HGO should be
examined and decision taken on merit;
While framed the Hajj Policy, the MORA should
be guided, inter alia, by the recommendations
made by the Competition Commission of Pakistan
to which reference has been made in Para 8 above;
and
The MORA should constantly monitor the working
and performance of each HGO during Hajj and this
assessment should form basis for further
improvements in Hajj Policy for next year’s Hajj”.
The petitioners’ grievance is that respondent No.2 while
preparing the Hajj Policy-2014 violated the guidelines settled by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan and has allotted quota of 15,000
pilgrims to HGOs who allegedly were functional in Hajj-2013.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are also engaged in the
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
3
business which the members of HGOs are doing and as such the
exclusion of the petitioners from the allotment of Hajj quota alone is
sufficient to establish the mala fide of respondent-government.
Learned counsel submits that the respondents have failed to up-load
the draft Hajj Policy-2014 as ordered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of Pakistan and on the petitioners’ repeated requests and letters draft
Hajj Policy was uploaded on 03.02.2014 on website. The petitioners
filed objections against the draft policy; the respondents on
28.05.2014 without deciding the petitioners’ objections finalized the
Hajj Policy, 2014 whereby the petitioners were excluded from the
allotment of Hajj quota for the year 2014. Further the Government has
surrendered 15,000 pilgrims quota from its quota in favour of Hajj
Organizers Association of Pakistan (HOAP) who were allegedly
functioning in 2013. Learned counsel submits that Hajj quota of 910
pilgrims was allotted to 19 newly enrolled companies without
ascertaining their entitlement on merit on the lame excuse that it was
the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. Learned counsel
thus prayed that:“(i)
(ii)
(iii)
the allocation of 50 % Hajj Quota and 15,000
under the name of Memorandum of Understanding
again to existing HGOs, already registered AND
also the distribution of Hajj Quota in the ratio of
50 % by the MoRA for Government Hajj Scheme,
consequently 100 % Hajj Quota be allotted to
qualified HGOs, whether existing of new entrants,
for collection/charging of 50 % Hajj Quota at
Government Rates and the rest at the rates decided
by the HGOs on the directions of the MoRA;
its application for the purpose of allocation of
quota to all selected HGO (s), as set out in Hajj
Policy-2014;
the criteria laid down for the purpose of allocation
of Hajj Quota to the existing HGO (s) without
fulfilling the conditions as set-out in Paragraph (s)
19 read 21 of the Hajj Policy, 2012 and the
deletion of the subject conditions in Hajj Policy2014 including but not limited to exclusion of tax
defaulters, bank defaulters and management
dispute, etc., etc.,”.
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
4.
4
Notices were issued to respondents; respondents Nos.1 to 6 & 8
filed reply and opposed the petitioners and stated that Hajj Policy2014 was placed before the Prime Minister of Pakistan on 01.04.2014
and the Prime Minister of Pakistan on 08.04.2014 approved the Hajj
Policy-2014; the Hajj Policy-2014 is based on agreement between the
Government of Pakistan and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; two
governments entered into an agreement whereby it was agreed that
after deduction of 20 % of the allotted quota to Government of
Pakistan in 2014 the Government of Pakistan can send 1,43,368 total
pilgrims, out of which 57348 will be sent by the Government of
Pakistan through its own resources and 86020 will be sent through
private tour operators and 1790 will be the administrative and medical
staff. The quota of 15,000 pilgrims is allotted to private tour operators
on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding dated 04.07.2013
entered into between the Ministry of Religious Affairs and Hajj
Organizers Association of Pakistan (HOAP) and witnessth by the four
Federal Ministers; as no additional quota was available to the
respondent-government, that is the reason the petitioners were not
invited for the allotment of pilgrims quota for the year 2014; HOAP
filed
application
under
Order
1
Rule
10
CPC
bearing
C.M.No.1503/2014 praying that they are necessary and proper party
being the beneficiary of the disputed quota of 15,000 pilgrims. The
petitioners have not seriously opposed the acceptance of said
application. The Hajj Organizers Association of Pakistan (HOAP) is
the beneficiary of disputed quota, hence, any order passed may effect
them, thus, they are necessary and proper party to the petition and as
such C.M.No.1503/20-14 is allowed and HOAP are impleaded as
party to the petition as respondent No.18.
5.
Learned counsel for respondent No.18 (HOAP) argued that the
petitioners’ credentials have already been scrutinized in earlier
litigation by MORA; this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the
constitutional petition; the respondent-government borrowed 15,000
pilgrims in 2013 from HOAP and to compensate the members of
respondent No.18 the MOU was entered into between the Ministry of
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
5
Religious Affairs as well as HOAP; the said MOU was duly executed
by four Federal Ministers; as per MOU, the respondent-government
was bound to allocate 15,000 pilgrims out of its 50 % quota to HOAP
as per the MOU dated 04.07.2013, Hajj Policy-2014 as well as the
agreement dated 20.01.2014 between two governments is based on
MOU dated 04.07.2013. Learned counsel submits that the petition is
without any substance and is liable to be dismissed.
6.
Learned Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan have adopted
the arguments of learned counsel for respondent No.18 and submitted
that in the year 2013, the respondent-government booked 15,000
pilgrims more than its allocated quota of 50 % and to save the
pilgrims from any disturbance, the respondent-government decided to
offer 15,000 pilgrims quota to private tour operators to HOAP in the
Hajj of 2014; the agreement between government of Pakistan and
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia thus clearly finds mentioned that in the year
2014 the total quota allocated to Government of Pakistan is 1,79,210
Hajis and after the deduction of 20 % due to expansion of Haram
Sharif in 1435 Hijri the total allocated quota was reduced to 1,43,368,
out of which the Government of Pakistan will send 57348 Hajjis
whereas the private tour operators will arrange for 86020 Hajis.
Learned DAGs thus submit that the Hajj Policy-2014 is based on the
agreement between the government of Pakistan and Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia, the MOU dated 04.07.2013 between MORA and
HOAP.
7.
Heard. Record perused.
8.
The first argument of learned counsel for the petitioners is that
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan directed the respondentgovernment that Hajj Policy be framed well in time in such a manner
which is fair, just, inspires confidence and evokes minimum criticism.
It is also imperative that the Hajj Policy for the next year should be
announced at the earliest after the conclusion of Hajj and the Hajj
Policy should be framed, announced and placed on the website of
MORA preferably within six weeks from the arrival of last flight of
Hajis from KSA. The draft policy when was uploaded although not as
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
6
directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, the petitioners
filed objections against the said policy; the respondents without
deciding the petitioners’ objections finalized the Hajj Policy-2014,
hence, on 07.07.2014 Ministry of Religious Affairs (MORA) was
directed to decide the petitioners’ objections within three days.
Respondent No.2 on the direction of this Court decided the
petitioners’ objection repeating the same grounds which the learned
DAGs have argued before this Court.
9.
It is an admitted fact that every year Hajj tour operators initiate
litigation against the respondents on one ground or the other. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan finally settled the guidelines for
framing Hajj Policy vide judgment Dossani Travels (supra). The
guidelines settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan for
framing Hajj Policy to the respondent-government are as under:(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
The Hajj Policy should be framed, announced and
placed on the website of MORA preferably within
six weeks of the arrival of last flight of Hajis from
KSA under intimation to the Registrar of this
Court. This of course would be subject to any
policy decision of the Saudi Government regarding
allocation of Hajj quota for Pakistan;
The Hajj Policy should be framed by a Committee
headed by the Secretary, Ministry of Religious
Affairs (MORA); a nominee of the Competition
Commission of Pakistan; a nominee of the
Secretary,
Ministry
of
Foreign
Affairs,
Government of Pakistan; a nominee of the
Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice Division
and Parliamentary Affairs; and a nominee of the
Attorney General for Pakistan;
The credentials of each applicant/HGO should be
examined and decision taken on merit;
While framed the Hajj Policy, the MORA should
be guided, inter alia, by the recommendations
made by the Competition Commission of Pakistan
to which reference has been made in Para 8 above;
and
The MORA should constantly monitor the working
and performance of each HGO during Hajj and this
assessment should form basis for further
improvements in Hajj Policy for next year’s Hajj”.
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
7
10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has specifically held
that the High Court is not enjoying the jurisdiction to interfere in the
policy matters of the Executive as it is against the principle of
trichotomy of powers, the foundational principle of the Constitution of
Islamic Republic of Pakistan. However, the High Court in its
jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic
of Pakistan can annul an “order” or a “Policy” framed by the
Executive, if it is violative of the “Constitution”, “law” or is “product
of mala fides”.
11.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan decided the parameters
of mala fide as under:“It was at that stage that the respondent writ petitioners
challenged the Hajj Policy, inter alia, on the ground
that the same was discriminatory and based on mala
fide. However, neither in the entire body of the
constitution petition filed before the learned High
Court nor in the arguments addressed before this Court,
any specific incidence of mala fide was pointed out;,
there was no allegation that appellants were given
quota on account of any connection with some
individual of political influence or any official in the
MORA; or that any individual in the said Ministry had
allotted the quota for personal gain. Mala fide is a
question of fact and has to be specific and not vague in
absence of which an order passed or policy framed by
the competent authority cannot be annulled on this
ground alone. In Dr. Akhtar Hassan Khan v. Federation
of Pakistan (2012 SCMR 455), dilating on mala fide as
a ground for judicial review, this Court at page 486
held as follows:-"The allegations of mala fides and of the impugned exercise
being collusive are questions of fact requiring factual inquiry. It
is by now a well established principle of judicial review of
administrative action that in absence of some unrebutable
material on record qua mala fides, the Court would not 'annul
the order of Executive Authority which otherwise does not
reflect any illegality or jurisdictional defect. In Federation of
Pakistan v. Saeed Ahmed Khan (PLD 1974 SC 15.1), this Court
was called upon to dilate upon the mala fides as a ground for
exercise of power of judicial review of administrative action and
the Court observed as follows:
"Mala fides is one of the most difficult things to prove and the
onus is entirely upon the person alleging mala fides to establish
it, because, there is, to start with, a presumption of regularity
with regard to all official acts, and until that presumption is
rebutted, the' action cannot be challenged merely upon a vague
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
8
allegation of mala fides. As has been pointed out by this Court in
the case of the Government of West Pakistan v. Begum Agha
Abdul Karim Shorish Kashmiri (PLD 1969 SC 14), mala fides
must be pleaded with particularity, and once one kind of mala
fides is alleged, no one should be allowed to adduce proof of
any other kind of malr fides nor should any enquiry be launched
upon merely on the basis of vague and indefinite allegations, nor
should the person alleging mala fides be allowed a roving
enquiry into the files of the Government for the purposes of
fishing out some kind of a case.
"Mala fides" literally means "in bad faith ". Action taken in bad
faith is usually action taken maliciously in fact, that is to say, in
which the person taking the action does so out of personal
motives either to hurt the person against whom the action is
taken or to benefit oneself. "
12.
For deciding the present issue, this Court has to see whether the
Hajj Policy-2014 is violative of the Constitution, law or is product of
mala fides and if it is established that the Policy is in violation of the
Constitution, law or is mala fide, this Court can interfere in the matter
in its constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution
of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
13.
The argument of learned DAGs as well as learned counsel for
respondent No.18 is that on 04.07.2013 the Ministry of Religious
Affairs (MORA) and Hajj Organizers Association of Pakistan
(HOAP) entered into the Memorandum of Understanding in the year
2013; as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia suddenly reduced 20 % Hajj
Quota due to expansion of Harm Sharif, but the Government of
Pakistan before the reduction of quota has made arrangements for Hajj
more than the reduced quota, in the year 2013, the allocated quota of
pilgrims was 50-50 between government of Pakistan and HOAP. As
per the reduction formula of KSA 10 % quota of both the parties was
to be reduced but due to unavoidable circumstances the Government
utilized the quota more than its entitlement. To avoid any disturbance
to Hajjis, the Government of Pakistan entered into Memorandum of
Understanding with HOAP assuring them that in the year 2014 the
Government will reduce their quota of 15,000 pilgrims for the year
2014 and will allow HOAP to book these 15,000 pilgrims in addition
to its approved quota.
14.
The perusal of Memorandum of Understanding did not support
the argument of learned counsel for the respondents. It is nowhere
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
9
mentioned that this MOU is being entered into between the parties
due to the reason that the Government of Pakistan has booked Hajjis
more than their allocated quota. It starts with the following words:“whereas both the parties have mutually agreed
and resolved”
15.
Learned DAGs have pointed out clause-d of MOU which is
read as under:“The change in the quota necessitated by the
extraordinary circumstances shall be without
prejudice to the original quota of Hajj Organizers
in 2013 before announcement of reduction or
revision”.
The clause referred did not give impression or establish that the
Memorandum of Understanding was entered due to the fact that the
Government of Pakistan borrowed 15,000 pilgrims quota from HOAP.
Further, the agreement between the Government of Pakistan and
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia also not finds mentioned this fact. The
agreement with KSA shows that the Government of Pakistan agreed
to send 57348 pilgrims through its resources and 86020 through
private tour operators, out of the allocated quota of 143368 pilgrims.
Hajj Policy-2014 also did not find mentioned the mutual
understanding of MORA and HOAP. It is nowhere mentioned in the
agreement between two Governments that Government of Pakistan
entered into an understanding with HOAP and as such the KSA is
enhancing the quota of HOAP, if the respondent-government was
itself agreed with KSA for reduction of its quota and enhancement of
quota of HOAP. Under heading 7 of Hajj Scheme 2014 the policy
provides as under:(I)
(II)
As a policy, there shall be NO free Hajj.
For Hajj 2014, there shall be two schemes i.e.
“Government Hajj Scheme” for those applicants
who intend to perform Hajj under Government
arrangements and “Private Hajj Scheme” for those
who want to make their Hajj arrangements through
Hajj Group Organizers (HGOs) in accordance with
Service Provider Agreement between HGOs and
Ministry.
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
10
(III) Out of the total Hajj quota of 143,368, 50 %
would be allocated to Government Hajj Scheme
which provides an economic package with
reasonable facilities for the pilgrims while balance
50 % would be allocated to Private Scheme i.e.
Hajj Group Organizers (HGOs) on the concept of
‘public private partnership’ to provide choice and
competition in the market. In accordance with the
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) concluded
between the Ministry and Hajj Organizers
Association of Pakistan (HOAP) on 14-07-2013,
the Ministry would allocate a quota of 15,000
pilgrims of Government Scheme to Private
Scheme on prorate basis to HGOs functional in
Hajj, 2013.
(IV) Ministry of Religious Affairs & Interfaith
Harmony reserves the right to re-adjust the share
of pilgrims to government and private schemes as
expedient.
(V) Applications for Hajj-2014 under Government
Scheme would be invited in March 2014.
(VI) Applications for Government Hajj Scheme will be
invited on the principle of “First come, First serve”
basis.
(VII) The criteria for determining the eligibility of
applicants will be time and date of deposit of Hajj
dues with the application form, duly complete in
all respect, in the designated banks.
(VIII) Under the Government Hajj Scheme, shared
accommodation @ 4 square meters per haji will be
provided with a rental ceiling of SR.3000 per
pilgrim.
(IX) Shuttle transport will be provided to pilgrims
accommodated in buildings beyond two
kilometers, except two days before and after Hajj.
(X) An amount of Rs.14,500 (SR 500), nonrefundable, would be charged from the pilgrims,
who opt for qurbani arrangements through
OPAP, in addition to the regular package as
qurbani dues. The qurbani coupon would be
purchased from Islamic Development Bank and
will be delivered to the pilgrims before Mina
movement.
(XI) 5 % of the total seats under Govt. Hajj Scheme
would be reserved and approved by the Ministry,
subject to availability:i)
Hardship and broken family cases.
ii)
Pilgrims recommended and fully funded by
charitable organizations such as Shaikh
Rashid Bin Said Al-Maktoum Hajj
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
iii)
iv)
16.
11
Foundation, sponsored by United Arab
Emirates etc.
Public
sector/corporate
organizations
recommending their employees with full
funding in labour/low paid categories under
their Corporate Social Responsibility.
Applicants belonging to far-flung/rural areas
including Gilgit Baltistan and Balochistan
etc. due to lack of access to the means of
communication”.
Clause -7 (III) of Hajj Policy, 2014 provides that out of Hajj
quota of 143,368, 50 % would be allocated to Government Hajj
Scheme which provides an economic package with reasonable
facilities for the pilgrims while balance 50 % would be allocated to
Private Scheme i.e. Hajj Group Organizers (HGOs) on the concept of
public private partnership to provide choice and competition in the
market. In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding
concluded between the Ministry and Hajj Organizers Association of
Pakistan (HOAP) on 14.07.2013 (in fact the MOU is dated
04.07.2013), the Ministry would allocate a quota of 15,000 pilgrims of
Government scheme to private scheme on prorate basis to HGOs
functional in Hajj 2013. The argument of learned counsel for the
respondents that 15,000 quota of pilgrims is in lieu of borrowed
Hajjis. But Hajj Policy only finds mentioned that MOU was agreed to
be entered into between MORA and HOAP, hence the fact of 15000
borrowed Hajjis in 2013 is not established on record. Now the
question arose the signatories of the MOU is the HOAP who may be
the representative body of Hajj Tour Operators but the other tour
operators who fulfill the criteria and requirement of law are equally
entitled to share the quota.
The MORA while deciding the
petitioners’ objection stated that “The committee considered the MOU
a sovereign commitment with HOAP duly signed by secretary of this
Ministry and endorsed by four sitting Ministers of different portfolios
i.e. Senator Ishaq Dar, Senator Pervez Rasheed, Sardar Muhammad
Yousaf and Pir Amin ul Hasnat Shah”. The perusal of MOU shows
that the Cabinet has not constituted such committee for giving any
assurance or execution of MOU comprising of four Federal Ministers.
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
12
Further the four ministers only witnessth the MOU but no one is in a
position to explain why the four Federal Ministers witnessth the MOU
that too without the authority on the part of the Cabinet. The Hajj
Policy-2014 only finds mentioned that HGOs functional in Hajj-2013
will only be entitled for the allocation of quota of 15,000 Hajis in
addition to the quota already granted by Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to
them. HOAP may be the Organizers whose members are the tour
operators but by incorporating an organization or becoming members
of the same organization, the association is not entitled to enter into an
agreement in exclusion of non-members who are in the same business.
In Hajj Policy 2014, the respondent-Government has declined even to
offer a single seat of pilgrim to the petitioners or all other tour
operators who are in the said business but are not the members of
HOAP. The MOU relied upon by the respondents is not supporting
the respondents’ stance; the entire Hajj Policy-2014 did not find
mentioned a single word that in the year 2013 seats of 15,000 pilgrims
were borrowed from the tour operators and the KSA has to grant
quota of 15000 in addition to agreed formula of 50-50. The HOAP is
already enjoying 50 % quota which is not a public private partnership
but it purely for the benefit of tour operators who are minting money
by providing facilities of Hajj in better hotels or places of residences.
17.
There is a huge financial difference between the expenses of
Hajj through private tour operators and government of Pakistan; the
Government of Pakistan is charging Rs.272,000/- from Per Haji
whereas respondents tour operators are charging even more than
Rs.1.000 Million per Hajji. Hajj is a sacred duty for the Muslims and
it is the bounded duty of the of the Government as well as the private
operators to assist the Muslims in the performance of Hajj and not to
burden them to that extent which becomes impossible for a Muslim to
perform this sacred duty. The Government should cater maximum
number of Hajjis by sending them for Hajj. It is interesting to note that
we are Muslim State but our Muslim State is not providing any
subsidy or financial assistance to Hajjis whereas a secular country
India is repeatedly providing different financial facilities to Muslims
W.P.No.13332 of 2014
13
for performing Hajj including subsidy in fare and other expenses. The
respondent-government thus has wrongly allotted 15,000 pilgrims
quota to respondents under the garb of MOU dated 04.07.2013, if the
Government was unable to cater these 15,000, the Government was
bound to offer the said quota to all the tour operators who intend to
apply or have applied for the allocation of quota, the government
should have also fixed the maximum expenses which the private tours
operators can only recover.
18.
The upshot of the above discussion is that Hajj Policy-2014 to
the extent of grant of quota of 15,000 pilgrims to the Private Hajj Tour
Operators as per list of 2013 is declared without lawful authority as
the same is against law. The respondent-Government should, in the
first instance, will utilize the quota so released itself and if the
respondent-Government is unable to perform its duty due to any
reason this quota of 15000 pilgrims will be offered to all the registered
tour operators of MORA.
19.
This petition is allowed in the above-said terms.
C.M.Nos.2 to 13 ,1434,1435,1466,1467,1504,1547,1562, 1698,
1699, 1325,1326, 1941, 1977,1978 of 2014
20.
As the main writ petition has been disposed of, these
applications have become infructuous, the same are accordingly
disposed of.
(Muhammad Khalid Mehmood Khan)
Judge
Announced in open Court on 15.07.2014.
(Muhammad Khalid Mehmood Khan)
Judge
APPROVED FOR REPORTING
Najum*