Islamabad - The Islamabad High Court yesterday turned down a petition seeking timeframe for final decision on en masse resignation of MQM lawmakers from both houses of the parliament as well as the Sindh Assembly.

The court rejected the petition seeking its directions to the chairman senate and speakers of national and Sindh assemblies to decide the issue of Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM) lawmakers’ resignations as per law.

Chief Justice Muhammad Anwar Khan Kasi termed the petition as non-maintainable since the petitioner has no locus standi in this matter.

During the hearing of this petition, the IHC bench questioned from the petitioner how he has been an aggrieved person in this issue. At this, the petitioner replied that any citizen of the country could invoke court’s jurisdiction regarding any lawlessness in sight.

Earlier, the IHC registrar office had also raised objection over the maintainability of the petition and Justice Kasi dismissed the petition while keeping that objection intact.

Earlier, the petitioner had prayed to the court to direct the speakers of national and Sindh assemblies, and the chairman Senate to do their duties under the law by deciding the matters of resignations of MQM legislators within reasonable time frame to be set up by the court.

Barrister Dawood Ghazanavi had moved this petition and made government of Pakistan through secretary ministry of law, justice and parliamentary affairs as respondent. He adopted in his petition that MQM lawmakers on 12th August 2015 handed over their resignations from membership of national assembly to the speaker national assembly. “Due to this, the citizens of Pakistan in those constituencies, where MQM party members were representing, have been deprived of having fair and equitable representation in the Parliament,” added Ghaznavi.

He continued that the Article 64 of the Constitution read with provisions of the Rule 43 “resignation of seat” of the rules of procedure and conduct of business of the national assembly, has been considered and interpreted by the Supreme Court and high courts in a chain of judgments and settled law is made, that the speaker is under a constitutional duty to undertake an inquiry personally when resignation by member of assembly is handed over to him in person or by other mean. He contended that the courts while considering and interpreting the Article 64 read with provisions of rule 43 in abovementioned judgments, have not construed the time frame under which the speaker will complete its inquiry.

“As Article 64 read with provisions of rule 43 of the rules of the business of the NA, is completely silent on setting any time frame, under which the speaker will conclude its inquiry. As indefinite time in deciding the matter by the speaker is loss of fair and equitable representation of the citizens of those constituencies where their representatives have handed over their resignations to speaker assembly and with their actions are not representing their people in the parliament,” added the petitioner.

Therefore he prayed that an order in nature of mandamus may be passed directing the speaker national assembly, Sindh assembly, and the chairman senate to do their duties under the law by deciding the matter of resignations submitted by the legislators of MQM within reasonable time frame to be set up by this court.

He further requested the court that an order in nature of prohibition may also be passed restraining the speaker national assembly, speaker Sindh Assembly and chairman senate from toeing the line of the government and playing politics in this matter.