AGL 37.24 Decreased By ▼ -0.76 (-2%)
AIRLINK 217.01 Increased By ▲ 3.10 (1.45%)
BOP 9.50 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.85%)
CNERGY 6.67 Increased By ▲ 0.38 (6.04%)
DCL 8.80 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.34%)
DFML 42.89 Increased By ▲ 0.68 (1.61%)
DGKC 95.18 Increased By ▲ 1.06 (1.13%)
FCCL 35.61 Increased By ▲ 0.42 (1.19%)
FFBL 88.94 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FFL 17.68 Increased By ▲ 1.29 (7.87%)
HUBC 128.02 Increased By ▲ 1.12 (0.88%)
HUMNL 13.26 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.82%)
KEL 5.34 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.56%)
KOSM 6.94 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
MLCF 43.67 Increased By ▲ 0.69 (1.61%)
NBP 59.79 Increased By ▲ 0.94 (1.6%)
OGDC 222.76 Increased By ▲ 3.34 (1.52%)
PAEL 39.95 Increased By ▲ 0.79 (2.02%)
PIBTL 8.26 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.98%)
PPL 196.75 Increased By ▲ 5.09 (2.66%)
PRL 39.13 Increased By ▲ 1.21 (3.19%)
PTC 27.80 Increased By ▲ 1.46 (5.54%)
SEARL 104.70 Increased By ▲ 0.70 (0.67%)
TELE 8.42 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.36%)
TOMCL 34.57 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-0.52%)
TPLP 13.13 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (1.94%)
TREET 25.61 Increased By ▲ 0.27 (1.07%)
TRG 73.15 Increased By ▲ 2.70 (3.83%)
UNITY 33.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.29 (-0.87%)
WTL 1.72 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 11,983 Increased By 88.5 (0.74%)
BR30 37,425 Increased By 569.9 (1.55%)
KSE100 111,430 Increased By 1006.6 (0.91%)
KSE30 35,032 Increased By 254 (0.73%)

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.