BR100 Decreased By (-0.08%)
BR30 Increased By (0.08%)
KSE100 Decreased By (-0.11%)
KSE30 Decreased By (-0.2%)
AGHA 7.53 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-1.31%)
BECO 5.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.46 (-8.26%)
BML 58.30 Decreased By ▼ -1.44 (-2.41%)
BOP 34.58 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.52%)
CNERGY 13.68 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (4.35%)
CSIL 6.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-1.72%)
FCCL 57.55 Decreased By ▼ -0.51 (-0.88%)
FFL 16.50 Increased By ▲ 0.27 (1.66%)
FNEL 1.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.83%)
KEL 7.36 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.94%)
KOSM 5.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.83%)
LOTCHEM 27.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-0.58%)
MLCF 101.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.82 (-0.8%)
NBP 203.29 Decreased By ▼ -1.77 (-0.86%)
NCPL 60.47 Increased By ▲ 0.84 (1.41%)
NPL 69.80 Increased By ▲ 1.24 (1.81%)
OGDC 318.48 Decreased By ▼ -0.44 (-0.14%)
PACE 11.12 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.63%)
PAEL 42.86 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-0.56%)
PIBTL 16.72 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (0.54%)
PPL 230.62 Increased By ▲ 1.17 (0.51%)
PRL 76.73 Increased By ▲ 5.93 (8.38%)
PTC 71.18 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.25%)
SSGC 27.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.13%)
TBL 10.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.29%)
TELE 8.56 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.35%)
TPL 23.59 Increased By ▲ 0.53 (2.3%)
TPLP 15.45 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.97%)
TREET 24.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.81%)
TRG 60.09 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.33%)

A constitutional petition, challenging the 19th Amendment Act, was filed in the Supreme Court on Monday, urging the court to direct the government and Judicial Commission (JC) for appointment of judges to refrain from any move for appointment of judges of Islamabad High Court (IHC).
One, Shahid Orakzai, filed the petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, making the Federation, through Secretary Ministry of Law and Attorney General, as respondents. The petitioner reminded the court that the latest amendment primarily is aimed at removing the flaws he had singularly pointed out in 18th Amendment in relation to the new High Court to be established in Islamabad.
He pointed out that Article 81 had never been part of the 18th Amendment but was now amended to make room for expenditure on the new High Court. The latest effort, according to the petitioner, only confirms that the previous attempt to amend the document was, in fact, a sheer violation of the constitution. He clarified that the expenditures listed in Articles 81 and 121 cannot be granted by the National Assembly or Provincial Assembly until they are approved by the president or the governor concerned.
The petitioner contended that the thoughtless majority of the two houses had made no change in Article 208 which reads that "Supreme Court and Federal Shariat Court, with the approval of the President and a High Court, with the approval of the governor concerned, may make rules providing for the appointment of court officers and servants and for their terms and conditions of employment.
The petitioner pointed out that the President has no direct concern with the office of any High Court and the four governors are least concerned about the Islamabad High Court. He submitted that the officers and servants of the court are appointed only by the Chief Justice of the High Court who alone can estimate the expenditures mentioned in Article 121.
The petitioner contended that the new High Court in federal capital would trespass the jurisdiction of the four High Courts as it would have jurisdiction in all the provinces. "The Supreme Court shall take note that while the four High Courts make such order under Article 199 only about their own province, the Islamabad High Court could make the same order about any of the four provinces", he cautioned.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2011

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.