Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 58

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 9th May 1969, in Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 169 of 1969 and 165 of 1969 read with the judgment and order of the same date in Letters Patent Appeal No. 161 of 1969). Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3)-Contention raised with regard to validity of resolution of High Court Bar Association covered by order of Supreme Court passed in a previous petition on same subject-Supreme Court declined to take a different view-Petition for Special Leave to Appeal dismissed.   Civil Petition No. 190 of 1969 S. M. Hassan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Wajid Hussain, Senior Attorney for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent.   Civil Petition No. 191 of 1969 Date of hearing : 23rd April 1970. JUDGMENT M. R. KHAN, J.--.These two petitions for special leave involve a common question of law, and this order will dispose of both of them. The point involved is whether Rashid Ahmad, the petitioner of Petition No. 190 of 1969 and Ghulam Hassan and Muhammad Asadullah, the petitioners of Petition No. 191 of 1969 were duly declared to be touts under -section 36 of the Legal Prac titioners Act. The High Court Bar Association, Lahore, at a special general meeting convened on the 9th September 1967, passed a unanimous resolution stating that as many as 20 persons named therein, including the present petitioners, habitually act as touts. These 20 persons also included two Advocates, namely, Raja Maula Dad and Raja Muhammad Ayub. It was further resolved to send the names of those 20 persons to the High Court of West Pakistan for placing their names on the list of touts. A learned Single Judge of the High Court proceeded against those persons other than the two Advocates against whom disciplinary action was being taken under the provisions of the Bar Council Act. The learned Judge gave the petitioners and others an opportunity of defending themselves and took down evidence and thereafter declared the 18 persons including the present petitioners to be touts. The persons who had been declared as touts took Letters Patent Appeals against the decision of the learned Single Judge.…