LHC stops govt from removing PHC commissioners

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Friday restrained the Punjab caretaker government from removing any commissioner of the Punjab Healthcare Commission (PHC) under a newly-promulgated ordinance.

Justice Raheel Kamran Sheikh passed the restraining order on a petition by the Pakistan Medical Association (PMA) challenging promulgation of the ordinance by the caretaker government, acquiring powers to remove PHC commissioners even without assigning a reason. An assistant advocate general appeared before the court and sought time to submit replies on behalf of the government and other respondents. A counsel for the petitioner asked the court to issue a stay order before allowing time to the government.

The law officer opposed the grant of interim relief on the ground that vires of the ordinance were under challenge. He said no removal of any PHC commissioner was under consideration at the moment.

Justice Sheikh ordered that no commissioner would be removed in exercise of authority under the impugned ordinance by the respondents without permission of the court till the next hearing on Nov 13. The judge observed that the rule against the grant of interim relief pending decision on vires of any provision of law was not an absolute one and in certain cases, the Supreme Court of Pakistan had granted interim relief in such terms as deemed appropriate by the court. He noted that the possibility of exercise of authority by the respondents under the impugned ordinance could not be ruled out altogether and in case of removal of any of the commissioners, it would not only cause an irreparable loss to him but may also render the petition infructuous. He observed that the balance of inconvenience also leaned against the respondents, therefore, a case for the grant of interim relief was manifestly made out.

The PMA petition contended that the caretaker government did not have the mandate to advise promulgation of an ordinance under Article 128 of the Constitution. It said even otherwise, the necessary prerequisites of Article 128 of the Constitution were not satisfied in the case. The petitioner said there were no circumstances rendering it necessary to take immediate action and promulgate the impugned ordinance.