Case Details

Citation(s)
1990 SLD 565 = 1990 MLD 1060
Sindh High Court
Civil Petition D-258 and Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 505 of 1989, decided on 21st January, 1990.
Presented By: Before Abdul Rahim Kazi and Qaiser Ahmed Hamidi, JJ
-------Sadiq Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Siddiq Kharal, Addl. A. G. for
Respondents.

HAMDARD COOPERATIVE SOCIETY---Petitioner

VERSUS

GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others---Respondents

Law: Cooperative Societies Act, 1925

Section: 60 , 63 , 65-B- , 5

Cooperatives Societies Act (VII of 1925)--- ---Ss. 60, 63 & 65-B---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Notices issued by Anti-Corruption Establishment against petitioner requiring him to record his statement in regard to complaint of corruption---Competency  of  such  notice  challenged  in  Constitutional petition---Provision of S. 65-B, Co-operative Societies Act 1925, provides that officers of the Society are public servants; thus any act of corruption or misappropriation by them would fall within the ambit of S. 5, Prevention of Corruption Act 1947---Bar contained is S. 63(3), Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 requiring sanction of Registrar Co-operative Societies before proceeding against officials of Co-operative Societies had no bearing on the present case--Section 63 has to be read with S. 60, Co-operative Societies Act, which in clauses (a) to (d) defines offences under the Act---Such definitions do not include the offence of corruption and misappropriation---Notices issued by Anti-Corruption Establishment against officials of Co-operative Society on complaint of corruption were, thus, not without lawful authority---Constitutional petition against issuance of notices was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Aijaz Ahmed v. The State 1987 P Cr. L J 1320 ref. Sadiq Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Siddiq Kharal, Addl. A. G. for Respondents. ORDER ABDUL RAHIM KAZI, J.--By the present petition the following relief is sought for by the petitioner:-- "(i) that the impugned notices, "F', "G" and "H", dated 9-6-1988, 9-2-1989 are illegal, ultra vires and without lawful authority, and as such the same are of no legal effect/s whatsoever, and. restrain the Respondents, particularly 2 and 3 from issuing such illegal notices to cause harassment to the petitioners and/or interfere in the performance of their duty as admissible and/or warranted under the law, and costs of the petition." Admittedly the above notices are issued by the Additional Circle Officer, Anti-corruption Establishment, Sukkur requiring the petitioner to attend his office…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register