AGL 40.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-0.4%)
AIRLINK 129.53 Decreased By ▼ -2.20 (-1.67%)
BOP 6.68 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.15%)
CNERGY 4.63 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (3.58%)
DCL 8.94 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (1.36%)
DFML 41.69 Increased By ▲ 1.08 (2.66%)
DGKC 83.77 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-0.37%)
FCCL 32.77 Increased By ▲ 0.43 (1.33%)
FFBL 75.47 Increased By ▲ 6.86 (10%)
FFL 11.47 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (1.06%)
HUBC 110.55 Decreased By ▼ -1.21 (-1.08%)
HUMNL 14.56 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (1.75%)
KEL 5.39 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (3.26%)
KOSM 8.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.58 (-6.46%)
MLCF 39.79 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (0.91%)
NBP 60.29 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
OGDC 199.66 Increased By ▲ 4.72 (2.42%)
PAEL 26.65 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.15%)
PIBTL 7.66 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (2.41%)
PPL 157.92 Increased By ▲ 2.15 (1.38%)
PRL 26.73 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.19%)
PTC 18.46 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (0.87%)
SEARL 82.44 Decreased By ▼ -0.58 (-0.7%)
TELE 8.31 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.97%)
TOMCL 34.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.12%)
TPLP 9.06 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (2.84%)
TREET 17.47 Increased By ▲ 0.77 (4.61%)
TRG 61.32 Decreased By ▼ -1.13 (-1.81%)
UNITY 27.43 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.04%)
WTL 1.38 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (7.81%)
BR100 10,407 Increased By 220 (2.16%)
BR30 31,713 Increased By 377.1 (1.2%)
KSE100 97,328 Increased By 1781.9 (1.86%)
KSE30 30,192 Increased By 614.4 (2.08%)

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday set aside the federal government's notification regarding removal of Muhstaq Ahmad Sukhera as Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO). Former Inspector General (IG) of Police, Punjab, Mushtaq Sukhera was appointed FTO in August 2017 by the then Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz government. However, the federal government removed Sukhera from the post of FTO by withdrawing the official notification for his appointment.
A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice Athar Minallah announced the decision in the petition of Mushtaq Sukhera, challenging his removal from the post of FTO.
The court verdict said: "The impugned notification was illegal and definitely issued in violation of the scheme of the Constitution, the Ordinance of 2000 read with the Act of 2013."
The IHC bench added, "This court cannot ignore the lack of care exercised by the Ministry of Law and Justice in initiating summary dated 17-05-2019. The attorney general could not give a plausible explanation regarding a different stance taken by the Ministry of Law and Justice in the case of the recently appointed Ombudsman under the Insurance Ordinance of 2000."
"The Ministry of Law and Justice was expected to have taken extraordinary care while initiating the summary because what had been proposed had serious consequences for an essential salient feature of the Constitution, ie, parliamentary form of government and democracy, besides the independence of a statutory adjudicatory public office."
The judgment further said that the Ministry of Law and Justice was proposing a course of action based on interpretation of section 3(1) of the Ordinance of 2000 which was a drastic departure from the interpretation that had led to appointments made from time to time for almost two decades.
Therefore, the petitioner prayed to the court to set aside the said impugned notification for being illegal and without jurisdiction. He also requested the court to restrain the respondents from interfering in the due performance and functioning of the petitioner as FTO.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2019

Comments

Comments are closed.