LAHORE - A Full Bench of the Lahore High Court, headed by Chief Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry on Tuesday dismissed a petition earlier filed by the PPPs Aurangzeb Burki to question authority of the sitting Speaker Punjab Assembly to appoint Chairman of the Punjab Service Tribunal and Ombudsman Punjab while acting as Governor in February 2008. In a short order, the Bench observed that 'acting Governor of the province makes appointments on any post, if needed, on the advice of Chief Minister of the province so such appointments cannot be declared illegal by the court of law. The Bench also held that 'acting Governor enjoys full powers to make appointments on any post while having acting charge of Governor. Earlier, the court had reserved judgment on the petition about a month ago after hearing detailed arguments from both parties to the petition. The petition was filed by PPP Finance Secretary Aurangzeb Burki in 2008 challenging powers of acting Governor to make appointments of permanent nature like Ombudsman and Chairman of the Service Tribunal. Acting Governor had appointed Justice (Retd) Jahangir Arshad as Chairman of the Services Tribunal Punjab and Khalid Mehmood as Ombudsman Punjab during Eid holidays in 2008 while holding post of acting Governor. The petitioner said the Speaker flagrantly violated his mandate during his brief stint as acting Governor and made certain 'illegal and unauthorised appointments. 'Punjab Governor went abroad on a three days personal visit and President appointed PA Speaker Rana Muhammad Iqbal as acting Governor but he misused his powers, he said. He said the post of acting Governor was created in case of absence of the Governor and the nature of the job was just the stopgap arrangement to perform the day to day functions of the government. He pleaded that so far as the policy matter as well as the appointments on key posts in the province was concerned, acting Governor was not authorised to perform such functions. The petitioners counsel had requested the court to define the ambit, scope of powers and authority of 'Governor as per Article 101 of the Constitution and that of 'Acting Governor as per article 104 of the Constitution. The petitioner stated that the said appointments amounted to overstepping the authority and use of the power that did not vest with him. Petitioner prayed to the court to declare the appointments as unconstitutional. The Court ,however, did not agree with the petitioner and dismissed the plea maintaining the appointments made by the sitting Speaker were legal.