Investment by dual national: SC says any slackness on the part of functionary also hit by principle of locus poenitentiae

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has noted that where the government-controlled functionaries make promise which ensues a right to anyone who believes them and acts under them, then those functionaries are precluded from acting detrimental to the rights of such person/citizen.

A three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, observed this, in the case of National Saving Centre's "Bahbood Saving Certificate Scheme.

The National Saving Central Directorate, Islamabad, (petitioner) had filed an appeal against a verdict Lahore High Court (LHC), Rawalpindi bench.

The National Saving Centre, Rawalpindi introduced a profit generating scheme with a high rate but it was solely designed to provide a special relief to senior citizens of Pakistan attaining the age of 60 years or above or widows unless, attain the status otherwise after re-marriage.

Muhammad Farooq Raja (respondent), a dual national of Pakistan and Denmark, availed the benefits of the said scheme, and invested Rs3 million "without any reservation on the part of National Savings (petitioner) authority".

The respondent continued to enjoy the benefit accrued to him in lieu of the purchase of the scheme.

However, at a later stage, the petitioner intimated Farooq Raja that he was not an eligible person to avail the benefits of the said scheme as he is a dual national.

The Saving Centre, Rawalpindi, transferred his money to a regular profit scheme even without seeking his consent.

Farooq Raja agitated the matter with the petitioner authority.

However, the respondent was said to have been declined redressal of his grievance by the petitioner.

The respondent approached the "Wafaqi Mohtasib", which directed the petitioner "to act in accordance with law".

It is said that the direction issued by "Wafaqi Mohtasib" in favour of the respondent proved to be a futile exercise.

Ultimately, the respondent had to file a constitutional petition before the LHC, Rawalpindi bench.

The said constitutional petition was entertained and decided by a single bench of LHC vide order dated 09 December 2019, in favour of the respondent.

The petitioner then filed an appeal against the LHC order in the Supreme Court.

The apex court judgment said the petitioner was under incumbent duty to scrutinise the status of the respondent prior to issuing acceptance, which has accrued a right in favour of the respondent, any slackness on the part of the petitioner at a belated stage cannot be burdened to the respondent, and the same is hit by principle of locus poenitentiae.

The court noted that the respondent being a national by birth is also holding nationality of Denmark, as a consequent he is enjoying the status of dual nationality, i.e., of Pakistan and of Denmark.

The incentive arising out of the said investment was extended in favour of the respondent in accordance with the rules framed under "Bahbood Saving Certificates Rules, 2003". During smooth continuation of the said scheme in favour of the respondent, on one fine morning, the petitioner intimated respondent that now he cannot claim the privileges of scheme as during scrutiny of the record, it has transpired that according to rule 5 of "Bahbood Saving Certificate Rules, 2003", he was ineligible to avail the said scheme.

The Court said that the case of the respondent is also covered by Section 24-A of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which clearly reflects that once a right is accrued, the same cannot be withdrawn unless and until it is established that the scheme was obtained by practicing or committing fraud or misrepresentation.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020