IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Present:

Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar

Mr. Justice Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui

C.P. No. D - 1083 of 2016

Dr. Muhammad Sharif…………………..………...…………………..Petitioner

Versus

Military Estates Officer and another……………..…………….Respondents

Date of hearing : 14.03.2017

Mr. Muhammad Anwer Tariq, advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Sohail H.K.Rana, advocate for CBC

a/w Muhammad Sajjad Ahmed, MEO, Karachi Circle

Mr. Muhammad Javaid K.K., Assistant Attorney Genera

----------------

FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J: Through this petition, the petitioner has sought directions of this Court for respondents to mutate the leased property i.e. bungalow No. 52/B, Depot Lines Karachi in the names of legal heirs as per law. It is the contention of the petitioner that despite the written instructions/policy of the Ministry of Defence, the respondents are demanding Letters of Administration for mutation of the property described above. According to him, the respondent No. 1 is bound to transfer/mutate the property on Heirship Certificate as described in the policy.

After service to the respondents, the respondent No. 1 appeared and submitted that the written instructions/policy dated 20-07-2009, relied upon by the petitioner, is merely an opinion expressed by the Law Officer of the Department as such the same has no binding effect. However, while disposing of this petition, the respondent No. 1 was directed to consider the application of the petitioner and decide the same within 15 days. After that, the petitioner filed a contempt application alleging therein that the order passed at the time of disposal of the petition was not complied with by the respondent No. 1. The alleged contemnor/MEO appeared and gave the undertaking to comply with the direction dated 20-12-2016 by deciding the application of the petitioner by 11-02-2017 strictly in accordance with law. On such undertaking, the previous contempt application was disposed of.

The petitioner has now filed the instant contempt application in which he contended that the order has yet not been complied with. In response to notice, the alleged contemnor/ME0 appears and submits that he has made compliance of the order of this Court. According to him, he has passed an order on the application of the petitioner and the petitioner has to furnish the Letters of Administration issued by the competent court of law as well as to fulfill the remaining formalities.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per written instructions/policy, there is no need for Letters of Administration. According to him, whatever is being demanded by the respondent No. 1 is unjustified and against the law. He submits that the respondent No. 1 is avoiding to mutate the property on Heirship Certificate issued by Justice of Peace. In response to a query, he submits that according to law, the Justice of Peace is authorized to issue Heirship Certificate.

We have seen the letter written by the alleged contemnor/MEO and addressed to the petitioner in which he comprehensively described the effect of the mutation and growing tendency of fraud. We are of the view that after a proper and comprehensive response in respect of the application of the petitioner, the question of contempt of the order of this Court does not arise. We are also of the view that the demand of respondent No. 1 to furnish Letters of Administration issued by a civil court is justified. As far as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that a Justice of peace can issue Heirship Certificate is concerned, we are of the view that law has not given such powers to a Justice of Peace. The office of Justice of Peace is created under Section 22 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and his powers in respect of documentation are mentioned in sub-section 5 of section 22-A of Cr.P.C, which reads as under:

“22-A. Powers of Justices of the Peace:

(1) -----

(2) -----

(5) A Justice of the Peace for any local area may, in accordance with such rules as may be made by the Provincial Government,--

a) issue a certificate as to the identity of any person residing within such area, or

b) verify any document brought before him by any such person, or

c) attest any such document required by or under any law for the time being in force to be attested by a Magistrate, and until the contrary is proved, any certificate so issued shall be presumed to be correct and any document so verified shall be deemed to be duly verified, and any document so attested shall be deemed to have been as fully attested as if he had been a Magistrate.”

From the bare perusal of the above provision of law, it is clear that a Justice of Peace can only issue a residential certificate to a person residing in his local area or attest documents, but he has no power to issue an Heirship Certificate. The upshot of the entire discussion is that the respondent No. 1 has already decided the application of the petitioner in respect of mutation of the property in question; therefore, we are of the view that no contempt of our earlier order has taken place. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent forum against the order passed by MEO on his application if he is so advised. With these observations, the instant contempt application is disposed of with no order as to cost.

JUDGE