Harassment challenged: Petition by Roti Corporation society disposed off
A division bench, comprising of Justice Maqbool Baqar, Justice Nisar Shaikh, earlier heard counsel for the petitioner.
KARACHI:
A petition filed by Roti Corporation of Pakistan Employees Cooperative Housing Society, against Registrar Cooperative Societies, was disposed off on Monday by Sindh High Court with the directive to the Cooperative Societies department not to harass the petitioner. It also ordered that while inspecting records they should act strictly according to the law.
A division bench, comprising of Justice Maqbool Baqar and Justice Nisar Muhammad Shaikh, earlier heard counsel for the petitioner, Muhammad Sadiq, the secretary of the society, who maintained that a letter for inspection was delivered to them by the Cooperative societies department. This was to counter our victory in a case adjudicated upon by a special anti-corruption court, he submitted.
“The notice was aimed at exerting undue pressure and intimidating us,” the counsel submitted, adding that the registrar also appointed an “administrator” against which they have to move and seek interference of the court. He appealed to the court to stop them from visiting the society.
The court rejected his plea to prevent visits but said that during the visits the conduct of the officials and any action taken should be “strictly according to the law and no harassment should be caused to the petitioner society.”
Published in The Express Tribune, March 20th, 2012.
A petition filed by Roti Corporation of Pakistan Employees Cooperative Housing Society, against Registrar Cooperative Societies, was disposed off on Monday by Sindh High Court with the directive to the Cooperative Societies department not to harass the petitioner. It also ordered that while inspecting records they should act strictly according to the law.
A division bench, comprising of Justice Maqbool Baqar and Justice Nisar Muhammad Shaikh, earlier heard counsel for the petitioner, Muhammad Sadiq, the secretary of the society, who maintained that a letter for inspection was delivered to them by the Cooperative societies department. This was to counter our victory in a case adjudicated upon by a special anti-corruption court, he submitted.
“The notice was aimed at exerting undue pressure and intimidating us,” the counsel submitted, adding that the registrar also appointed an “administrator” against which they have to move and seek interference of the court. He appealed to the court to stop them from visiting the society.
The court rejected his plea to prevent visits but said that during the visits the conduct of the officials and any action taken should be “strictly according to the law and no harassment should be caused to the petitioner society.”
Published in The Express Tribune, March 20th, 2012.