0
KARACHI, July 16: A Sindh High Court division bench deplored that illegal recovery methods continue to be employed against credit card holders defaulting on payments despite warnings and declarations that creditor banks should have recourse to remedies made available to them by law.
The bench, which consisted of Justices Mrs Qaiser Iqbal and Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, asked the banks to devise ways and means for recovery of outstanding amounts within the legal parameters in consultation with the State Bank of Pakistan. The procedure evolved by consensus should ensure the rights and interests of the parties, the card holders and the banks. The Constitution guarantees fundamental rights, including dignity, security and safety of person, and they should in no case be violated. The police are bound to protect the safety and privacy of every individual.
Disposing of a petition moved by an employee of the Civil Aviation Authority through Advocate Gohar Iqbal, the bench restrained the banks from raiding the residence or office of the petitioner to harass or humiliate him or members of his family through their recovery squads. The banks should adopt only the lawful measures for recovery of outstanding amounts, if any.
Petitioner Hari Ram complained that he obtained credit cards from ABN Amro Bank , Union Bank, UBL, HBL, Standard Chartered Bank, Bank Al Falah and Citibank when their representatives visited him and persuaded him to buy their cards in return for a number of facilities that would improve the quality of his life. Because of high interest rates and compound interest, he soon defaulted on payments. Any payment made by him was adjusted against interest and some of the amount still remained due.
The bank recovery teams visited his house near the airport and insulted him and his family in front of his neighbours. The recovery men enjoyed full protection of the local police and instead of helping him, the law enforcers refused to register his complaint against the raiders.
Tando Allahyar Nazim
The Sindh High Court barred the administration and police from harassing Dr Raheela Magsi, District Nazim, Tando Allahyar, and asked the district co-ordination officer and other executive officers to perform their functions in accordance with law.
Issuing notices to the respondents for August 8, the division bench also asked the police and other prosecution agencies to refrain from instituting cases against the petitioner nazim in relation to the performance of her functions in the meantime. The bench, which consisted of Justices Mrs Qaiser Iqbal and Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, remarked after hearing Advocate Anwar Mansoor Khan for the petitioner that the powers and duties of the nazim have been spelt out by the Sindh Local Government Ordinance and all concerned should adhere to its provisions.
Citing the chief secretary, the local government secretary and the DCO as respondents, the petitioner said she was elected nazim in 2005 and launched a number of projects for development and public welfare to fulfil the promises made by her to the electorate. Some of the projects had been completed and others were nearing completion when the provincial government decided to post a new district co-ordination officer in April. The new DCO soon started running a parallel district administration.
Her orders, the petitioner said, were violated with impunity and the DCO and other district officers employed and posted by the provincial government created every possible hurdle in her way. A key officer involved in the preparation of the annual budget was transferred when he was badly needed to finish the budgetary work. Development funds were not released in time and projects were allowed to suffer. A sports stadium and schools were the worst sufferers of the government’s and the respondent officers’ acts of omission and commission. The officers were now conspiring to oust her through a no-confidence motion. The councilors were being pressurized and lured into adopting a motion of her recall.
The petitioner requested the court to direct the provincial local government department, the DCO and other officers to strictly adhere to the provisions of law and perform their functions without indulging in intrigues against her in an attempt to oust her.
Truck attached
Justice Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, meanwhile, ordered attachment of a Lasbela-bound dumper truck (TKD-563) involved in killing Muhammad Ashraf, 45, at Korangi in May.
Advocate Aamir Maqsood submitted on behalf of the widow and three minor children of the deceased that the mishap was caused by rash and negligent driving for which both the owner and the driver were liable to pay the plaintiff legal heirs Rs4.5 million in damages. However, the owner was trying the remove the truck out of the court’s jurisdiction in order to frustrate a possible decree in favour of the plaintiffs.
The court asked the Korangi SHO, who had earlier released the truck, to impound it and keep it at the police station till further orders. The excise and taxation authorities were asked not to execute transfer of the vehicle.
Petition allowed
The bench consisting of Justices Qaiser Iqbal and Khwaja Naveed Ahmed, meanwhile, allowed a petition moved by Anwar Alam Subhani, an officer of the police legal department, for promotion to Grade 18 and directed the selection board to consider his case at its next meeting this month.
Mr Subhani said he joined government service as junior clerk in 1980. He was working in the labour appellate tribunal in grade 14 when he was transferred to police legal section in 1992 because of his competence. Later, he was appointed assistant attorney in grade 16. However, while his work was praised, he was never allowed promotion on the basis of his seniority. If a government servant is transferred without being given any choice, he is given the benefit of the seniority already earned by him. However, his pre-transfer seniority was not counted and he was only ‘moved over’ to grade 17 on his appointment as prosecution deputy superintendent of police.
