SC ends ban on protest by govt employees, labour unions
Suspends BHC order stating high court crossed its jurisdiction
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday suspended the Balochistan High Court (BHC) order and removed the ban on protests by government employees and labour unions.
The court ruled that launching protests and giving calls for protest was the fundamental right of government employees and trade unions.A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Gulzar Ahmed, while hearing the appeal filed by the Balochistan Government Teachers Association, ruled that launching a protest was the fundamental right of every employee.
Habibur Rehman Mardanzai, General Secretary, Balochistan Government Teachers Association, had filed an appeal in the Supreme Court (SC) against the order of the Balochistan High Court passed on December 9, banning the protests of government employees and labour unions.
Appearing on notice, Asma Jehangir, the counsel for petitioners, informed the court that the BHC had banned the protest of labour unions of government organisations on December 9.She submitted that the learned BHC had ruled in its order that if any government employee protested, the chief secretary was required to take action against the employee by filing a treason case against the protester.
The learned counsel further informed the court that in its order, the learned BHC had also ruled if the chief secretary failed to take action against the protesters, he would be proceeded against.Asma Jehangir further contended that government teachers of the province had peacefully observed a hunger strike without ransacking property or causing any loss.
Meanwhile, the court, after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel, ruled that the learned BHC in its ruling had crossed its jurisdiction.The court further ruled that launching a protest or giving a call for protest and forming labour unions was the fundamental right of government employees. The SC suspended the order of BHC and issued notices to the parties concerned and adjourned the hearing for date-in-office.
-
Meghan Markle 'terrified' Over Possible UK Return -
Did Opiate Restrictions Lead To Blake Garrett's Death? -
Royal Expert Reflects On Princess Eugenie, Beatrice 'priorities' Amid Strained Relationship With Sarah, Andrew -
Prince William's 'concerning' Statement About Andrew Is Not Enough? -
50 Cent Gets Called Out Over Using Slur For Cardi B -
Scientists Discover Rare Form Of 'magnets' That Might Surprise You -
Nancy Guthrie’s Kidnapper Will Be Caught Soon: Here’s Why -
AI Innovation Could Make Trade Secrets More Valuable Than Patents, Says Billionaire Investor -
King Charles Heckling: Calls For 10 BAFTAs And A Knighthood For Sign Language Interpreter -
Kim Kardashian Leaves Meghan Markle 'upset' With Latest 'cheap Shot' -
Royal Expert On Andrew, Sarah Ferguson’s ‘entitled’ Behaviour Since Marriage -
Instagram And YouTube Accused Of Engineering Addiction In Children’s Brains -
Trump Reached Out To Police Chief Investigating Epstein In 2006, Records Show -
Keke Palmer Praises Actor Who Inspired 'The Burbs' Role -
Humans May Have 33 Senses, Not 5: New Study Challenges Long-held Science -
Kim Kardashian Prepared To Have Child With Lewis Hamilton: 'Baby Using A Surrogate'