Islamabad - The Islamabad High Court will Monday (today) resume the hearing of a contempt of court petition against secretaries of cabinet division and climate change division.

A single bench of IHC comprising Justice Noor-ul-Haq N Qureshi will take up the matter in which the same court had summoned both the secretaries.

The IHC bench had issued the orders in a petition of Abdul Haye Agha, a communication officer in climate change division, and directed the respondents to appear before the court in person on the next hearing.

The petitioner had moved the court through his counsel Raja Saif-ur-Rehman Advocate and argued before the court that the federal government has not been fulfilling its commitment regarding regularisation of his services.

It was April 16, 2013 when the federal government through a deputy attorney general (DAG) had committed before an IHC bench that the petitioner is a contractual employee but before end of his contract on December 31, 2013, his services will be regularized.

Former judge of IHC Justice Riaz Ahmad Khan had duly incorporated DAG’s statement in the IHC judgment dated April 16, 2013 and had also observed that the cabinet sub-committee has recommended regularization of the petitioner.

Abdul Haye nominated secretary establishment division, secretary cabinet division and secretary climate change division as respondents in this matter.

He adopted before the court that through a January 21, 2013 letter secretary establishment had directed secretary climate change division to adjust the petitioner against a regular post on priority basis.

The petitioner added that the respondent secretary climate change division not only defied orders of secretary establishment division but the orders of this court as well and hence there should be contempt of court proceedings against secretary climate change division.

He prayed to the court to initiate contempt of court proceedings against secretary climate change division and he may also be directed to immediately regularize services of the petitioner.

While issuing the abovementioned, the IHC bench observed, “Instead of implementing decision/order of this court in its letter and spirit, authorities concerned, due to malfeasance, extended the project though they were bound to follow their own commitments to regularize the petitioner from the date of termination his contract i.e. December 31, 2013.

Now they have given another date of completion of project, which was extended time-to-time.

This act of respondent is observed adversely. They by hooks and crooks not only tried to defeat the process of law but also the judgment passed by this court.

They also disowned their commitments, thereby they betrayed the court, therefore, respondents cited in the petition are required to appear in person before the court on next date of hearing.”