AGL 40.15 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (0.38%)
AIRLINK 130.25 Increased By ▲ 0.72 (0.56%)
BOP 6.80 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (1.8%)
CNERGY 4.61 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.43%)
DCL 9.00 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.67%)
DFML 43.79 Increased By ▲ 2.10 (5.04%)
DGKC 84.19 Increased By ▲ 0.42 (0.5%)
FCCL 33.03 Increased By ▲ 0.26 (0.79%)
FFBL 78.70 Increased By ▲ 3.23 (4.28%)
FFL 11.87 Increased By ▲ 0.40 (3.49%)
HUBC 110.79 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (0.22%)
HUMNL 14.61 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.34%)
KEL 5.67 Increased By ▲ 0.28 (5.19%)
KOSM 8.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.83%)
MLCF 39.80 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.03%)
NBP 60.85 Increased By ▲ 0.56 (0.93%)
OGDC 200.24 Increased By ▲ 0.58 (0.29%)
PAEL 26.71 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.23%)
PIBTL 7.82 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (2.09%)
PPL 160.99 Increased By ▲ 3.07 (1.94%)
PRL 26.94 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (0.79%)
PTC 18.85 Increased By ▲ 0.39 (2.11%)
SEARL 83.24 Increased By ▲ 0.80 (0.97%)
TELE 8.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-1.32%)
TOMCL 34.45 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.17%)
TPLP 9.12 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.66%)
TREET 17.14 Decreased By ▼ -0.33 (-1.89%)
TRG 59.89 Decreased By ▼ -1.43 (-2.33%)
UNITY 27.81 Increased By ▲ 0.38 (1.39%)
WTL 1.43 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (3.62%)
BR100 10,544 Increased By 137 (1.32%)
BR30 31,957 Increased By 243.3 (0.77%)
KSE100 98,460 Increased By 1131.7 (1.16%)
KSE30 30,626 Increased By 433.9 (1.44%)

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.