PLJ 2013 Islamabad
Present: Iqbal Hameed-ur-Rehman, C.J.
HASSAN RAZA
SYED--Petitioner
versus
DISTRICT &
SESSIONS JUDGE (WEST) ISLAMABAD
W.P. No. 1741 of
2012, decided on 12.6.2012.
Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 (10 of 1984)--
----Art. 85--Constitution of Pakistan
Mr. Irshad Ahmed Suleria, Advocate
for Petitioner.
Date of hearing:
12.6.2012.
Order
Through the
instant Constitutional Petition under Article-199 of the Constitution of the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the
impugned order dated 09-04-2012, whereby, the application filed by him for
supply of certified copies of complete inquiry proceedings, regarding missing
of the original file of execution petition titled "PPL Vs. Hassan Raza Syed" was disposed of
by the learned District Judge (West), Islamabad.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued
that according to Article-85 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 the judicial enquiry comes within the
definition of public document, and according to Article-87 of the Order ibid,
the petitioner is entitled for the grant of certified copies of the complete
inquiry proceedings got conducted by the Inquiry Officer. Learned counsel for
the petitioner has also relied upon the "Rules and Orders of the Lahore
High Court, Lahore Volume V, Part B" which
relates to the grant of copies and translation of record.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and perused the documents appended with the instant petition.
4. Petitioner, through the instant writ petition
seeks setting aside of the order dated 09-04-2012, whereby, his application for
supply of certified copies of inquiry proceedings was disposed of by the
learned District Judge (West), Islamabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner
has argued that according to Article-87 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, the petitioner is entitled for the
grant of certified copies of the inquiry proceedings conducted by the Inquiry
Officer.
5. According to Article-87 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984,
every public officer having the custody of public document, which any person
has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on
payment of the legal fees. Learned District Judge (West) Islamabad in his order
dated 09-04-2012 has mentioned that preliminary inquiry was conducted by the
Inquiry Officer and in this regard a report has been submitted by the Inquiry
Officer concerned, whereas, an order for holding of regular inquiry has been
passed, as such, the inquiry has not yet been concluded by the Inquiry Officer
and at such a stage, certainly no person has a right to inspect any document
relating to the inquiry proceeding, therefore, according to the Article-87 of
the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order,
1984, the petitioner's request for issuance of certified copies of the
proceedings to him, could not be acceded to. The petitioner in his writ
petition has mentioned that according to Article-85 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, the Judicial
inquiry comes within the definition of public document, therefore, the
petitioner is entitled for the grant of certified copies of the Inquiry
proceedings conducted by the Inquiry Officer. The stance taken by the
petitioner has no legs to stand because the inquiry conducted by a judicial
officer regarding missing of a file or negligence/acts of omission and
commission of an official of District Court cannot be termed as judicial
inquiry, rather, such an inquiry is conducted in pursuance of the
administrative order passed by the authority concerned. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has also referred to Part-B of the Rules and Orders of the Lahore
High Court, Lahore Volume V. (Part B). From the perusal of the said Rules and
Orders, I have reached to the conclusion that the same relate to copy or
translation of a judicial record, whereas, the inquiry proceedings, which have
also yet not been concluded, cannot be termed as judicial record. Moreover, it
would not be out of place to mention here that according to Article 87(3) of
the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order,
1984 "Official notes and correspondence or copies thereof, being not
public documents, shall not be issued and shall not be admissible in any
case."
6. In the above perspective, I am inclined to
hold that the instant writ petition has no merits. Resultantly the same stands
dismissed in limine.
(R.A.) Petition
dismissed
