No laws can overrule court docket choice: SC


The Supreme Court on Wednesday noticed that there could possibly be no laws overriding its choice.

A five-judge bigger bench of the apex court docket, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, was listening to the overview petitions filed in opposition to its Aug 17 verdict, which had declared as unlawful and unconstitutional a PPP-era regulation known as the Sacked Employees (Reinstatement) Ordinance Act, 2010, (SERA) underneath which quite a few folks had been employed or promoted in 1989-90. The verdict had rendered round 16,000 authorities staff jobless.

The court docket famous that the place would the independence of the judiciary be that if legal guidelines had been handed in opposition to its selections.

Sardar Latif Khosa, the lawyer representing the dismissed staff of Sui Gas and State Life, contended that recruited employees had been fired as quickly because the PPP authorities got here to an finish.

“The PPP had also reinstated the judges sacked during the eras of dictatorship. The PPP’s election promise was to reinstate employees,” he added.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah famous that unlawful dismissals had been happening since 1947. “Why have only these few employees been reinstated?” he inquired.

Khosa replied that after their dismissal, the staff had approached the courts.

“The courts reinstated several employees and upheld the dismissal of many others.”

Justice Shah remarked that there could possibly be no laws in opposition to the choice of the court docket.

“If the court punishes someone, can parliament acquit him through legislation?”

Read Why ought to court docket probe audio leak if involved events not , asks IHC CJ

He added that restore all of the individuals who had been sacked thus far if this course of needed to be adopted.

Justice Bandial famous that the staff who had filed the overview petitions had been quickly recruited.

“Parliament cannot make decisions on the basis of compassion alone.”

Justice Shah noticed that some staff had been fired in 1996-97. “Some decisions went in their favour and some were against them,” he added.

“In the presence of court decisions, a law was brought after 11 years and the people sitting at home were reinstated.”

Justice Bandial famous there ought to have been no laws in 2010 within the wake of the 2003 court docket choice.

“Is it right to give relief to employees who were employed for six months in the same way as those who were employed for 12 years?”

He added that within the context of 2003 court docket choice, there was no laws in 2010.

“Those who were recruited in 1996 were expelled in 1997, so they worked for 6 months only.”

The decide remarked that the court docket choice of 2003 was associated to those that had labored for 10 years and had been recruited in 1988-89.

Khosa mentioned that no court docket had dominated in opposition to the staff earlier than 2021.

Justice Shah famous that the principle query was why the case of sacked staff was not introduced earlier than the court docket.

During the listening to, lawyer basic for Pakistan additionally got here to the podium and took the place that it could be acceptable for the case of these reinstated underneath the ordinance to approach the excessive court docket.

The listening to of the overview petitions was adjourned until Thursday (immediately).

Back to top button

Adblocker detected! Please consider reading this notice.

We've detected that you are using AdBlock Plus or some other adblocking software which is preventing the page from fully loading. We don't have any banner, Flash, animation, obnoxious sound, or popup ad. We do not implement these annoying types of ads! We need money to operate the site, and almost all of it comes from our online advertising. Please add to your ad blocking whitelist or disable your adblocking software.