AGL 40.21 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.45%)
AIRLINK 127.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.05%)
BOP 6.67 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.91%)
CNERGY 4.45 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-3.26%)
DCL 8.73 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.68%)
DFML 41.16 Decreased By ▼ -0.42 (-1.01%)
DGKC 86.11 Increased By ▲ 0.32 (0.37%)
FCCL 32.56 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.22%)
FFBL 64.38 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (0.55%)
FFL 11.61 Increased By ▲ 1.06 (10.05%)
HUBC 112.46 Increased By ▲ 1.69 (1.53%)
HUMNL 14.81 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-1.73%)
KEL 5.04 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (3.28%)
KOSM 7.36 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-1.21%)
MLCF 40.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-0.47%)
NBP 61.08 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.05%)
OGDC 194.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.69 (-0.35%)
PAEL 26.91 Decreased By ▼ -0.60 (-2.18%)
PIBTL 7.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.53 (-6.79%)
PPL 152.68 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (0.1%)
PRL 26.22 Decreased By ▼ -0.36 (-1.35%)
PTC 16.14 Decreased By ▼ -0.12 (-0.74%)
SEARL 85.70 Increased By ▲ 1.56 (1.85%)
TELE 7.67 Decreased By ▼ -0.29 (-3.64%)
TOMCL 36.47 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.36%)
TPLP 8.79 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.5%)
TREET 16.84 Decreased By ▼ -0.82 (-4.64%)
TRG 62.74 Increased By ▲ 4.12 (7.03%)
UNITY 28.20 Increased By ▲ 1.34 (4.99%)
WTL 1.34 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-2.9%)
BR100 10,086 Increased By 85.5 (0.85%)
BR30 31,170 Increased By 168.1 (0.54%)
KSE100 94,764 Increased By 571.8 (0.61%)
KSE30 29,410 Increased By 209 (0.72%)

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Monday upheld an office objection and directed a petitioner’s counsel to furnish minutes of a Punjab caretaker cabinet’s meeting that approved interest-free loans for its 11 judges of the court.

The court took up a ‘public interest’ petition as an “objection case” since the registrar office had raised objections on its maintainability.

The office objected to the unavailability of different necessary documents including the minutes of the cabinet meeting. The court directed the petitioner’s counsel to remove the office objection first.

The counsel assured the court of providing a copy of the cabinet’s meeting minutes.

The petitioner Mashkoor Hussain pleaded that the caretaker cabinet approved a facility of interest free loan to each judge equal to 36 basic pays for the purchase/ construction of houses. He said each of the 11 judges has a basic pay to the tune of rupees 912,862.

The petitioner pointed out that the loan amount was being released in one installment and would be recovered from the judges through deduction of one-fourth basic pay on a monthly basis. Eventually, the interest-free loan would be recovered in 12 years while some of the judges would reach superannuation in a year or before the recovery of the loan amount.

He stated that there was no precedent that a loan, that too interest-free, was recovered from the pension of a government servant. He said the judges on their own made a desire to get interest-free loans and that the act made them look like politicians who would usually misuse power for personal gains.

He argued that the act of the judges had serious repercussions as the public would lose its confidence in the judiciary and consider the judges biased because the cases before judiciary were always against the executive branch.

The petitioner said the impugned act of respondents and the judges also amounts to violation of Article 2-A and Article 25 of the Constitution.

He said the public and even the poor were being charged 22 percent interest on loans from the banks while a judge withdrawing a whopping salary was getting interest-free loans.

The petitioner prayed to the court to set aside the approval of the interest-free loans to the judges for being illegal. He asked the court to direct the government to charge interest if the loan was already granted to the judges as it was being charged from the public at large.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023

Comments

Comments are closed.