ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Tuesday castigated former federal minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed for bringing political matters before the court and warned him of ‘exemplary fine’ if he moved the similar petition again. A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice Athar Minallah conducted hearing of Awami Muslim League (AML) chief Sheikh Rashid Ahmed’s petition, challenging the appointments of federal ministers and special advisors to the prime minister as their total number exceeded the prescribed strength of federal cabinet.
The IHC bench’s judgement said, “The petition is frivolous and ought to have been dismissed with imposition of exemplary costs. However, the Court exercises restraint on account of respect for the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) because the petitioner is one of the chosen representatives.”
It further said, “The Court is not inclined to exercise its extra ordinary discretionary jurisdiction and, therefore, the petition is dismissed in limine.”
In his petition, Rasheed invoked the constitutional jurisdiction vested in this court under Article 199 of the Constitution, seeking a writ to declare that respondents no 4 to 75 have been appointed as federal ministers and ministers of state in violation of Article 92(1) of the Constitution. The IHC bench mentioned in its judgment that it has been admitted in the petition that under Article 92 of the Constitution, the Prime Minister is empowered to nominate not more than fifty members of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) to form the Cabinet and it has been unequivocally admitted in paragraph 8 of the petition that the present Cabinet consists of thirty four Ministers and seven Ministers of State. It added that likewise, it is not disputed that four Advisors have been appointed on the advice of the worthy prime minister and the composition of the cabinet is definitely not in violation of the restrictions imposed by the Constitution.
The court continued that it was further declared that special assistants were not members of the cabinet, and that there was no restriction regarding the number of such appointments. Justice Athar said that it is ironic that instead of settling political disputes in the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), political leaders prefer to invoke the jurisdiction of the constitutional courts. The bench added, “This tendency has undermined the prestige, sanctity and effectiveness of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament). Simultaneously, it unnecessarily drags the courts into controversies of political nature.