The Sindh High Court on Friday asked the federal government to appoint the federal member from Sindh in the Indus River System Authority (Irsa) as already decided by the court.
Hearing a petition with regard to the appointment of the federal member of Isra from Sindh, a division bench of the SHC headed by Justice Mohammad Faisal Kamal Alam observed that the best course for the federal government in the situation would be to appoint a federal Irsa member from Sindh to promote national harmony as an order of the high court is in the field.
The high court observed that a legislative amendment in the Indus River System Authority Act 1992 could be made so that this issue was permanently settled.
The high court directed both the federal and provincial governments to take concrete steps so that no harm was caused to national unity, which should be preserved, promoted and preferred at all cost.
A federal law officer sought time to file para-wise comments on the petition. The law officer submitted that no further action had been taken in compliance with the court’s restraining order.
The petitioner’s counsel, Zamir Ghumro, submitted that the federal government was committing contempt of the court order by not appointing the federal member of Isra from Sindh as the case was already decided by the court and it had attained finality.
The Irsa secretary submitted that they would abide by any appointment order issued by the federal ministry of water in compliance with the court order. He said that an Irsa federal member had been appointed twice from provinces other than Sindh.
The high court observed that illegal orders could not be protected by the government and it was expected that the federal government may appoint an Irsa federal member from Sindh till the next date of hearing and adjourned the hearing till April 29.
The SHC also continued the interim order restraining the federal government and Irsa from taking any further action in pursuance of the water availability certificate of January 25, 2024, regarding water supply through link canals for Cholistan.
The petitioner, Qurban Ali Maitlo, had submitted in the petition that appointments made to Irsa were not being made in accordance with the law, which was a prerequisite for ensuring transparency, merit and good governance.
He maintained bias was manifestly evident in a recent decision to construct the Cholistan and Thal Canal Phase-II, despite insufficient water in the Indus basin. Consequently, he submitted that the very existence of the Indus delta, which was already facing an ecological disaster characterised by seawater intrusion, loss of mangrove forests, dwindling fisheries and saltwater contamination of freshwater sources, was at the risk.
The high court was requested to direct the respondent federal member to show authority of the law under which he was holding his office of the federal member of Irsa, and in case of his failure to do so, issue writ of quo warranto against him declaring his office vacant forthwith.
He also sought a declaration that the decisions made by Irsa, including but not limited to the Water Availability Certificate January 25, 2024, were unconstitutional and void ab initio, having been made without lawful authority and in violation of the fundamental rights of the people of Sindh and the province’s rights under the constitution and laws of Pakistan.