Reconstitution of CDA's board: IHC reserves judgment on maintainability of petition

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday reserved its judgment on maintainability of a petition challenging the federation's decision regarding the reconstitution of the civic agency's board.

A singe bench of IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah heard the petition, and reserved the verdict over maintainability of the petition, after hearing the arguments of the petitioner's counsel.

In his petition, the petitioner has cited the federal government, the secretary Interior, the secretary CADD, the chairman CDA Board, Rana Shakeel Asghar, Member Financial and Administration of CDA, Dr Shahid Mehmood, Member Planning and Development and Member Engineering, Naveed Ilahi Member (Estate) and Syed Safdar Ali, secretary CDA Board as respondents.

He stated that Ministry of Interior and the CDA issued an advertisement whereby in the year 2019, applications for the posts of Member (Finance), Member (Engineering), Member (Planning and Design), Member (Administration) and Member (Estate) were advertised.

He added that in addition to it, the advertisement clearly laid down the criteria of experience and qualifications for the said posts as was also mandated and prescribed by the CDA Ordinance, 1960.

The petitioner informed the court that the process of selection was carried out and the candidates/aspirants were short-listed but no appointment was made or finalised.

He added that in the meanwhile, the chairman CDA Board appointed respondents 5 to 9 in an "unlawful, arbitrary, illegal manner and in violation the procedure as prescribed in CDA Ordinance and Regulations".

He contended that the chairman himself was on the additional charge and temporary appointment did not entitle him to make appointment in the CDA Board. He further said that the chairman had usurped the powers of the Federal Government in making the illegal appointments.

He maintained that entrusting the key positions of the CDA concerned with policy making to "unqualified and unsuitable" persons by the chairman was "illegal, unlawful and unconstitutional".

Therefore, he prayed before the court that the appointments of respondents no 5 to 9 might be declared illegal and unlawful as the same had been made in derogation to the laws and judgments of the superior courts.

He also requested the court that the relevant authorities might be directed to probe into the matter of illegal appointments made by the chairman of the CDA Board.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020