M. D. TAHIR, ADVOCATE vs FEDERAL GOVERNMENT through Secretary, Cabinet
This constitutional petition challenged the legality of the Federal Government's establishment of 'Khidmat Committees,' a system of administrative bodies appointed by the government rather than elected representatives. The petitioner argued that no law authorized the creation of this parallel administrative structure. The Federal Government contended that it possessed the executive authority to establish such committees without specific legislative backing. While the court noted that the petitions had become infructuous because the new government had subsequently disbanded the committees, it proceeded to address the legal controversy. The court held that the establishment of the Khidmat Committees was illegal. It affirmed the principle that all executive actions must be supported by law, as mandated by Article 4 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that the Constitution does not envisage or permit the creation of a parallel system of administration that interferes with established government functions, particularly when elected local councils are already in place. Consequently, the court declared the executive action unconstitutional for lacking a legal basis.
- Does the Federal Government possess the authority to establish a parallel system of administration without legislative backing?
- Must every executive action taken by the government be supported by a specific law?
- Can the executive branch create administrative committees that interfere with the functioning of existing government offices and elected bodies?
- Article 199, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 4, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.---This judgment shall dispose of Writ Petition No,6899 of 1998 alongwith many connected matters which are mentioned in Armexure 'A' to this judgment which may be reard as its part.
2. Mr. M.D. Tahir who is an Advocate of this Court has, by filing this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. 1973, challenged the formation and constitution of Khidmat Committees by the Federal Government. According to the petitioner there is no law which authorizes the Federal Government to constitute and set up a parallel system of administration through Khidmat Committees, the Members of which are not elected representatives of the people, but have been appointed by the then Government in power.
3. The learned Deputy Attorney-General has, however, submitted that the Khidmat Committees were established in the exercise of executive powers by the Federal Government and there was no need of any law. It was pointed out that the Government in the exercise of its executive powers has issued the Notification on 4-8-1997 constituting the Khidmat Committees which was later on modified by the Notification dated 25-3-1998. According to the learned Deputy Attorney-General the Federal Government had full power and authority to establish such committees.
4. The Khidmat Committees were set up and established by the previous Government. Now the committees have been disbanded by the new Government and as such these petitions have fructified. However, in view of the nature of controversy we are tempted to make certain observations and to say that the establishment of these committees was totally illegal. It is trite law that every executive action must be backed by some law. If any authority is needed reference may be made to Haji Ghulam Zamin and another v. A.B. Khokhat and others PLD 1965 Dacca 156 and Khalid Malik v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1991 Kar.
1. Furthermore, Article 4 of the Constitution ordains that every person has a right to insist that he be dealt with in accordance with law and law alone.
5. It is interesting to notice that the Notification whereby the Khidmat Committees were set up does not even mention the source of power under which it was being issued. A reading of the Notification shows that Members of the Khidmat Committees were given wide and sweeping powers and they could interfere in the functioning and affairs of the Government and its offices. A parallel system of administration is not envisaged by the Constitution nor could it be set up. Even otherwise we are unable to understand the rationale in setting up such Committees when the local councils comprising elected representatives of people were already functioning. These petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
Cited by 8 cases
- ARIF HUSSAIN DAR vs BOARD OF REVENUE Through Its Secretary, Muzaffarabad & 5 Other K.L.R. 2002 Labour & Services 82
- Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce and Industry vs Federation of Pakistan through the Ministry of Communications and another 2004 CLD 1254
- SHAMSUL HAQUE MAHAR and others vs PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief 2013 PLC (C.S.) 1046
- ABDUL BASEER TAJWAR and others vs AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR PUBLIC 2017 PLJ AJ&K 64
- ARIF HUSSAIN DAR Versus BOARD OF REVENUE through Secretary 2002 PLD 14
- RAJA MUHAMMAD Versus Mst. SHAMIM AKHTAR 2008 PLD 408
- MUHAMMAD MUNEER AWAN Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT 2002 MLD 1953
- ABDUL BASEER TAJWAR Versus AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 2018 PLC(CS)N 146