PHC warns of issuing arrest warrants if non-compliance continues

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) observed on Monday that the court would be forced to issue non-bailable arrest warrant against the high-ups of various departments in the province if they continued non-compliance with the court orders to submit replies in the cases.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Qaiser Rashid Khan and Justice Syed Afsar Shah refused to release the salary of secretary Board of Technical Education Khyber Pakhtunkhwa after he failed to submit reply in a writ petition despite repeated notices.

During hearing, Justice Qaiser Rashid observed that nowadays the salaries of secretaries concerned are being attached for non-compliance with the court orders, but they are not concerned with that and they were not submitting replies even after stopping of their salaries.

He remarked that if this situation continued, the court in future would be forced to issue non-bailable arrest warrants against the top officials (secretaries) for non-compliance with the orders. 

The bench asked the secretary concerned that his salary would be released after submission of proper reply in the case.

The court had attached his salary for non-compliance with the court’s orders to submit comments in a case. Secretary Board of Technical Education Hidayatullah appeared in the case and informed the court that the comments are prepared and would be submitted in a day or two in the case.

However, the court directed the secretary to submit the comments within three days and fixed the case on June 24.

The bench was hearing contempt of court petition filed by Shad Muhammad, a former employee of Board of Technical Education, through his lawyer Arshad Hussain Awan.

The petitioner’s lawyer submitted that his client was retired as machine operator from the institution in 1994. However, the board did not give him pension and other benefits since 1994. He said that the high court then issued an order to the Board of Technical Education to immediately release the pension and other benefits to the petitioner.

He said that despite the court’s direction, the board was not giving pension to the petitioners and thus he filed the contempt of court petition against the officials concerned.