VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1[2] ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:11:35 01/23/05 Sun
Author: JAVED
Subject: FIND OUT WITH MICROSCOPE WHERE IS JUSTICE IN IT

By Javed - 31 August 2003

Former Chief Justice Supreme Court Mr. Justice ® Sajjad Ali Shah on the title of “Courts, Justice and Government” in his article in Nawai-e-waqt 2.6.2002 says a lady in her letter complained that in our beloved country there was no justice and she was so depressed that she was sorry why she was born in Pakistan. The lady in question is daughter of Ashiq Hussain Jatoi who was murdered with Mir Murtza Bhutto in which case alleged accused were not merely released on bail but also were appointed on import postings.


I do not agree with those who go too extreme saying there is no justice in Pakistan. It is my personal unshakable belief justice does exist in Pakistan but it depends merely on your Luck” and not on your merit, evidence in your support or your arguments but merely a stroke of luck or in simple word it is just a “lottery” that you get a “justice”. It is well known fact there is a lot of difference between “justice” and a “Decision”. And this is what Justice Nizam in one of his papers a decade back stated that today tendency in courts was to deliver a “Decision” rather than arriving at “justice”. The example can be seen the person who was accused of “contempt of court” with his neck tight walked out of court ”as usual” but a lower level newspaper reporter in same case went inside Jail.

Justice Mr. Sajad Ali Shah says “justice not merely should have been announced but it should appear to have in effect been given”. Here below is a self explanatory example of justice in which not merely “justice does not appear to has been delivered” rather the “lowest remotest justice” has “even” not even been announced merely with lips.

In 1993 a newspaper large size advertisement appeare from a private company of Islamabad named ABC Co. for allotment of plots in its “New Islamabad” project. The advertisement stated Rawalpindi Development Authority (RDA) has issued a NOC to it. People as usual seeing RDA a government authority’s reference applied and paid the money. When people were sending installments, all of a sudden installment receipts started coming from another company named MNP Co. Later correspondence started company from yet another named company XYZ company.

Some allottees due to this change of continued change of company name and no substantial development got disappointed and approached Rawalpindi Development Authority which as usual did not give any response. When continuously pressed RDA took shelter that in 1992 it issued a list of housing projects which did not have approvals and advised people not to deal with those projects. But it did not give answer to a million dollar question you issued this list in 1992 but why then you remained silent when one year later in 1993 the advertising company quoted your NOC/approval reference quoted to have been issued in 1993. If the advertisers had given any bogus and fake approval reference then why did not you informed the public that advertiser was telling lies. RDA’s silence was not any surprising because it is well known no crime or irregularity can ever be committed unless there is someone backing you from the concerned dealing and controlling department. Surely there was some one whose palms must have been duly greased by the advertisers in 1993 which kept the RDA silent by not informing the public it approval reference was fake. People went to Punjab Ombudsman hoping there would some justice. Punjab Ombudsman seeked the report from provincial authorities. Deputy Commissioner Rawalpindi submitted a report saying that both owner/advertiser of the scheme as well as the scheme itself was doubtful.

The Punjab Ombudsman in his order merely mentioning DC’s report finalized the case and issues his decision without any instruction to DC or any mention if scheme was fraud/doubtful then what should DC or provincial authorities should do to save the complainants. When an aggrieved approaches a court, an ombudsman or any other judge that universally means that after finding the facts a “Directive/Decision ” would be announced accepting or rejecting the complaint. In this case there is not a single world about directive, decision, instruction, any remarks about attitude of Rawalpindi Development Authority.

Mr. Justice ® Sajjad Ali Shah may perhaps find any “even one percent” ingredient of “true justice” in this Punjab Ombudsman decision.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2017 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.