24. Rules of Business:- Rules of Business (Central Government) Rule 5(14)Question is whether appellant (Former Minister) directed Chairman OGDC to appoint 145 persons in the said organization in violation of rules and procedure? It was duty of concerned secretary the officer concerned or competent authority, as the case may be, to apprise elected representative of the legal position – Rules 5(14) of Rules of Business (Central Government) framed of Constitution mandates as under: (14) If any order passed happens to contravene a law, rule or policy, it shall be the duty of next below Officer to point out this to the authority passing the order. Notwithstanding mandate of their calling in terms of Rule 5(14) of Rules of Business, Chairman OGDC himself was competent authority and he issued requisite orders – He, therefore, could not absolve himself of responsibility both morally and legally – It is in evidence that Chairman OGDC was not only statutorily independent but had on more than one occasion, disagreed with appellant (minister) and his opinion prevailed – August S.C. held that in absence of any positive evidence allegation of undue influence could not be inferred – In instant case no prosecution witness has alleged undue influence or pressure rather admittedly all notifications of appointments, except three, were issued after appellant was no longer a Minister – Held: No violation of Rules and procedure –