ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wedn­e­s­day summoned complete record including order sheets of the Lahore High Court (LHC) in a litigation pending before it for implementation of its March 25 order for the restoration of local government institutions in Punjab.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gul­zar Ahmed, the SC bench also dropped hints at inquiring about the real culprit responsible for delay in the implementation of the SC order. The apex court had taken up the contempt petition moved by 15 chairmen of different district councils and mayors for not allowing the local government in the province to resume functions.

The SC in its March 25 order had directed the Pun­jab government to immediately restore local government institutions after declaring Section 3 of the Punjab Local Government Act (PLGA) 2019 whereby the local bodies were dissolved as ultra vires of the Constitution. According to the court ruling, the local governments as existing in the Punjab before the promulgation of PLGA’s Section 3 stand restored and shall complete their term expiring on Dec 31, 2021 in accordance with the law.

While representing Local Government and Community Development Department (LGCD) Secretary Noorul Amin Mengal before the apex court on Wednesday, Advocate Khalid Mehmood Khan took the plea as also taken earlier in a report that after the SC short order, the Punjab government had moved a review petition before the apex court to seek guidance for implementation of the short order in the absence of a detailed judgement while highlighting financial and administrative implications involved in the restoration of local bodies. Later on July 5, the SC announced the detailed judgement and exhaustively provided reasons for the short order after which the LHC took cognizance of the matter on a petition moved by Mubashir Javed for the implementation of the March 25 judgement.

Lahore mayor complains chief secretary refused to meet members

The report stated that the Punjab chief secretary and LGCD secretary on July 19 furnished before the LHC notifications pertaining to constitution of tehsil, district, divisional and provincial transition teams to ensure smooth transfer of properties, rights, funds, claims, liabilities, officers and employees/servants to the restored local governments. In response, the LHC modified its order to the extent that the funds could be used for salaries, pension as well as for operational costs with respect to sanitation, water and related matters. However, the funds would not be used for development works until a proper plan of action was placed before the court, the report stated.

On Wednesday, the Punjab government also placed before the Supreme Court the Oct 17, 2021 notification stating that pursuant to the March 25 short order and the July 5 detailed judgement, the provincial government withdrew earlier notifications of appointing administrators to exercise control over the local governments under the PLGA, subject to the outcome of the review petitions. But the drafting of the notification was faulty, the chief justice observed, adding the provincial government believed the local government institutions had been restored.

At the hearing, Advocate Ibadur Rehman Lodhi also accused Punjab Chief Minister Sardar Usman Buzdar of the delay in the implementation of the March 25 order. He argued the provincial government had taken the plea before the LHC that the SC judgment could not be implemented.

The court, however, postponed further proceedings for two weeks.

Soon after the case, Lahore mayor retired colonel Mubasshir Malik told the media that the chief secretary had declined to meet members of the local government despite the fact that they waited outside his office for quite some time.

Rawalpindi mayor Sardar Naseem Khan alleged that the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf government had doled out the funds meant for local governments to members of the National Assem­bly and Punjab Assembly.

In the contempt plea, the petitioners had pleaded that the respondent (Punjab) government was duty bound under the Constitution to entrust the transfer of powers smoothly and without any interruption to the petitioners and other members of the local governments. However, the petitioner had regretted, the government had taken all it could to hamper them from taking charge of their offices and exercise powers conferred upon them under the law. They had apprised the court that members of different local government institutions had not been allowed to take control of their offices, as the provincial government had been exercising control over the local governments through the administrators appointed under its May 4, 2019 notification.

Published in Dawn, October 21st, 2021