The Federal Ombudsman (Wafaqi Mohtasib) in Pakistan is an independent institution established to redress complaints of maladministration by federal government agencies. Its primary function is to provide a forum for individuals and entities to resolve grievances against public officials or institutions in a manner that is swift, inexpensive, and impartial. This institution operates under the Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983 and subsequent legal frameworks, such as the Federal Ombudsman Institutional Reforms Act, 2013.
Likely Cases and Jurisdiction
The Federal Ombudsman typically addresses cases involving:
- Maladministration: Actions by federal agencies that are unjust, discriminatory, unreasonable, or involve delays in performance or abuse of authority (e.g., tax maladministration, delayed service delivery).
- Federal Agencies: Complaints regarding institutions like the Federal Board of Revenue, National Database and Registration Authority, and utility companies operating under federal jurisdiction.
- Public Grievances: Issues related to public services such as tax refunds, billing disputes, or denial of lawful benefits.
However, the Ombudsman does not address matters involving criminal proceedings, foreign relations, or those already pending before courts.
Post-Ombudsman Decisions: Appeals and Legal Recourse
When a complainant or a respondent is dissatisfied with the Ombudsman’s decision, the next recourse typically involves:
- Representation to the President: Under the Federal Ombudsman Institutional Reforms Act, 2013, aggrieved parties may file a representation before the President of Pakistan. The President has appellate jurisdiction to review the Ombudsman’s recommendations or findings.
- Constitutional Petitions: If a party remains dissatisfied, they can approach the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. The High Court may review the Ombudsman’s decision for jurisdictional errors, lack of lawful authority, or procedural irregularities.
Legal Principles from Case Citations
- 2002 PTD 1539 (Oil Trade v. Secretary Revenue Division): The Ombudsman refrains from intervening in cases where a complainant does not deny the substantive default under tax law, suggesting that jurisdiction is limited to allegations of maladministration, not mere dissatisfaction with lawful tax demands.
- 2001 YLR 1759 (Muhammad Iqbal v. National Bank): Highlights the principle of alternate remedy. The Federal Ombudsman is often considered a forum of first recourse, and constitutional petitions are deemed inadmissible if such alternative forums are available.
- 2024 CLC 953 (Saleem Ahmed Jan v. Deputy Commissioner): Clarifies that the Ombudsman functions as part of the executive branch and cannot adjudicate constitutional property rights beyond its jurisdiction. The High Court declared certain powers of the Ombudsman under the Enforcement of Women’s Property Rights Act, 2020, ultra vires to the Constitution.
- 2023 CLC 638 (AIOU v. Federation of Pakistan): Stresses that the Ombudsman must adhere to statutory time limitations when handling complaints, reinforcing the legal principle that procedural lapses can invalidate Ombudsman decisions.
- 2021 PLC(CS) 1563 (Jubilee Life Insurance Co. v. Federal Government): Reiterates jurisdictional limits, particularly that complaints involving incidents within a province may fall outside the Federal Ombudsman’s authority if provincial laws apply.
- 2021 SCMR 483 (CDA v. Rana Munawar Khan): Establishes that Ombudsman’s decisions on administrative delays (e.g., imposition of delayed payment charges) must align with fairness and contractual terms, but these decisions can be challenged for exceeding jurisdiction.
- 2020 CLD 829 (MCB v. Federation of Pakistan): Emphasises that quasi-judicial forums like the Ombudsman cannot exercise the powers of a court, particularly in relation to contempt proceedings, which remain the exclusive domain of higher judiciary under Article 204 of the Constitution.
- 2019 PLD 169 (Sui Northern Gas Pipelines v. Wafaqi Mohtasib): Defines “agency” under the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and reinforces that actions perceived as unreasonable or unjust fall under maladministration.
The Federal Ombudsman serves as a crucial mechanism for addressing grievances against public institutions but operates within strict statutory and constitutional boundaries. The cited cases underscore the Ombudsman’s role in providing administrative relief while highlighting the limitations of its jurisdiction, procedural compliance, and the appellate recourse available to aggrieved parties.
Questions and Answers on Litigation Involving the Federal Ombudsman with References
- Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman intervene in disputes regarding additional tax under the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979?
A: No. The Federal Ombudsman cannot intervene in cases where the complainant has failed to deny committing the alleged default, as in the absence of a plea regarding refund or illegality (2002 PTD 1539). - Q: Is a constitutional petition maintainable if an alternate remedy is available through the Federal Ombudsman?
A: No. If an alternate remedy exists, such as approaching the Federal Ombudsman, the constitutional petition under Article 199 is not maintainable (2001 YLR 1759). - Q: Can a Federal Ombudsman order a refund of delayed payment charges?
A: Yes. The Federal Ombudsman can direct the refund of delayed payment charges if the imposition was discriminatory or irrational (2024 CLC 1407). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman enforce property rights under the Enforcement of Women’s Property Rights Act, 2020?
A: No. The provisions of the Act have been declared ultra vires by the High Court, voiding such jurisdiction (2024 CLC 953). - Q: Can complaints against federal universities for maladministration be entertained by the Federal Ombudsman?
A: Yes, but failure to determine the limitation period before hearing renders the decision unsustainable (2023 CLC 638). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over banking disputes involving internet banking fraud?
A: Yes. The Banking Ombudsman can intervene where negligence by banks in fraud detection is evident (2022 CLD 1448). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman impose major penalties like compulsory retirement?
A: No. The Federal Ombudsman cannot impose such penalties; they must refer the matter for regular inquiry under relevant service rules (2022 PLC (CS) 15). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over family property disputes mentioned in a Nikahnama?
A: No. Such disputes must be resolved by the Family Court if territorial jurisdiction issues arise (2022 CLC 1955). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman reject recommendations based on the rank of inquiry committee members?
A: No. The Ombudsman cannot reject recommendations solely based on the rank of committee members (2022 CLC 1477). - Q: Is the Federal Ombudsman empowered to punish for contempt under Section 12 of the Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reforms Act, 2013?
A: No. The power to punish for contempt cannot be vested in the Ombudsman as it violates Article 204 of the Constitution (2020 CLD 829). - Q: Can a complainant approach both the Federal Ombudsman and the Inquiry Committee simultaneously?
A: No. Under Section 8 of the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010, the complainant must choose one forum (2021 PLC (CS) 839). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman reinstate employees terminated for harassment claims?
A: No. The Federal Ombudsman has no jurisdiction over employment reinstatements under the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010 (2021 PLC (CS) 1563). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over disputes regarding tax refunds for non-resident Pakistanis?
A: Yes. The Ombudsman can direct authorities to refund tax deductions improperly imposed on non-residents (2020 PTD 642). - Q: Can jurisdictional disputes between federal and provincial ombudsmen arise?
A: Yes. Jurisdiction depends on whether the matter pertains to federal or provincial areas, as seen in harassment complaints (2019 PLD 17). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman address maladministration in quasi-judicial matters?
A: Yes, provided the actions fall under maladministration as defined under Article 9 of the Ombudsman Order, 1983 (2019 PLD 169). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over property disputes between private individuals?
A: No. The Ombudsman cannot intervene in purely private disputes or non-governmental contractual matters (2021 MLD 301). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman order the release of income tax refunds delayed by administrative inefficiency?
A: Yes. The Ombudsman can direct authorities to expedite tax refunds and address procedural delays (2018 PTD 1617). - Q: Can a dismissed complaint before the Federal Ombudsman be reconsidered?
A: No. Unless new evidence or jurisdictional errors are proven, dismissed complaints cannot be reheard (2023 CLC 638). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman enforce penalties under the Gas Theft Control and Recovery Act, 2016?
A: No. Jurisdiction over gas disputes has shifted to Gas Utility Courts under special legislation (2018 PLD 51). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman adjudicate in cases involving the National Tariff Commission?
A: No. Issues related to the National Tariff Commission fall outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction (2013 PTD 1331). - Q: Does filing a complaint before the Federal Ombudsman toll the limitation period for court proceedings?
A: No. Time spent before the Ombudsman is not excluded from limitation periods for filing suits (2013 PLD 221). - Q: Can a constitutional petition challenge a decision of the Federal Ombudsman?
A: Yes, but only on grounds of jurisdictional errors, coram non judice, or mala fides (2021 PLC (CS) 839). - Q: Are Ombudsman recommendations binding?
A: Recommendations are not binding but are generally implemented as a matter of propriety (2024 CLC 953). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman inquire into disputes regarding delayed project payments?
A: Yes. The Ombudsman can address such disputes if discrimination or maladministration is proven (2024 CLC 1407). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over educational institutions’ disciplinary actions?
A: No. Provincial Ombudsman may have jurisdiction, depending on territorial and legislative factors (2018 PLD 581). - Q: Can service matters of employees dismissed under harassment allegations be brought to the Federal Ombudsman?
A: Yes, but the Ombudsman cannot impose penalties or reinstate employees (2022 PLC (CS) 15). - Q: Can the Ombudsman rule on matters already decided by a special tribunal?
A: No. Once a tribunal or court has adjudicated, the Ombudsman lacks jurisdiction (2020 CLD 829). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over tax policy disputes?
A: No. Policy matters are beyond the scope of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction (2014 PTD 1950). - Q: Can the Ombudsman grant interim relief?
A: Yes, but only when irreparable harm or maladministration is evident (2015 PTD 289). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman hear complaints regarding private insurance policies?
A: No. Such disputes fall under the jurisdiction of Insurance Tribunals (2010 CLD 1103). - Q: Can a dismissed petition by the Federal Ombudsman be appealed to the President?
A: Yes. The President may review or amend decisions of the Federal Ombudsman (2016 PLD 872). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over utility service disputes?
A: Yes. Maladministration in utility services can be addressed, but jurisdiction depends on procedural compliance (2012 PTD 524). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman adjudicate upon tax demands made after statutory limitation periods?
A: Yes. Demands made beyond limitation periods can be declared invalid (2007 PTD 963). - Q: Is the Ombudsman bound by procedural laws like the Civil Procedure Code?
A: No. The Ombudsman follows a simplified procedure but must adhere to principles of natural justice (2014 PTD 1554). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over postal services disputes?
A: Yes, provided maladministration is proven (2020 PTD 642). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman adjudicate in provincial jurisdiction matters?
A: No. Federal Ombudsman jurisdiction is limited to federal matters unless the law specifies otherwise (2019 PLD 17). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman investigate insurance companies for refusal of claims?
A: Yes, but only if statutory requirements are met (2016 PLD 433). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman enforce international treaties?
A: No. The Ombudsman’s jurisdiction is confined to national law (2015 CLD 679). - Q: Can tax assessments finalized by the Federal Ombudsman be challenged?
A: Yes. Such decisions can be challenged on jurisdictional or procedural grounds (2018 PTD 1617). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman’s jurisdiction extend to military personnel?
A: No. Matters involving military personnel fall outside the Ombudsman’s purview (2010 PLD 223). - Q: Can the Ombudsman impose fines for non-compliance?
A: Yes, under the Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reforms Act, 2013 (2020 CLD 675). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over private hospital charges disputes?
A: No. Only public-sector institutions can be reviewed (2021 PLD 481). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman resolve disputes over public procurement?
A: Yes, provided corruption or maladministration is alleged (2022 CLC 1477). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over harassment at the workplace?
A: Yes, under the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010 (2022 PLC (CS) 839). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman address non-compliance with utility connections?
A: Yes, provided negligence or arbitrary refusal is proven (2021 PTD 645). - Q: Does the Ombudsman have jurisdiction over income tax exemptions?
A: No. Policy and administrative decisions are excluded (2013 PTD 1397). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman review employment benefits?
A: No. Employment benefits are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction unless malfeasance is involved (2019 PLC 27). - Q: Can the Federal Ombudsman review disputes about pension payments?
A: Yes, provided pension laws or regulations are misapplied (2012 PLD 183). - Q: Can the Ombudsman mediate disputes between federal agencies?
A: No. The Ombudsman cannot mediate but can recommend procedural improvements (2011 PLC (CS) 245). - Q: Does the Federal Ombudsman have jurisdiction over energy sector subsidies?
A: No. Energy sector subsidies are policy matters beyond Ombudsman authority (2024 CLC 1407).
Call for Legal Consulation +92-3048734889 (WhatsApp)
Email : [email protected]
https://joshandmakinternational.com
