The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday directed the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to conduct a comprehensive inquiry into the recruitment process of Hajj assistants (Muavineen) and supervisors, setting a two-month deadline for its completion.
A single bench comprising Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas heard the petition filed by Gulnaz Baloch and others challenging the selection process.
During the proceedings, the court was informed that the recruitment process for the Hajj assistants had already been finalized. Consequent upon the completion of the recruitment process, the court declared the petition as infructuous to that extent.
However, Justice Minhas ordered a probe into the matter, directing the FIA to investigate the selection mechanism carried out in collaboration with the Ministry of Religious Affairs and the National Testing Service (NTS).
The court ordered the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) to submit the FIA inquiry report to the chamber for inspection. The IHC further directed that the FIA chief must complete the investigation within two months of receiving a copy of the order.
Deputy Attorney General Mian Faisal Irfan, along with officials from the Ministry of Religious Affairs, appeared before the court on behalf of the federal government.
While disposing of the petition with directives for the inquiry, the court made it clear that the recruitment process stands completed, and no further relief could be granted on that count.
Separately, the Islamabad High Court expressed strong dissatisfaction over the research conducted by the Capital Development Authority (CDA) regarding the cutting of Paper Mulberry trees in the federal capital.
The court warned that any further tree felling within Islamabad’s limits would be considered contempt of court and would be punishable.
A single bench comprising Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro heard a petition filed against the cutting of trees in the capital. During the proceedings, Justice Soomro remarked that the court would decide the case after hearing arguments from the CDA in the next hearing. We have not sentenced anyone for contempt in the last year and a half,” the judge observed. “But now, if any CDA officer is found involved in cutting trees, they will face contempt of court. It is deeply regrettable that institutions function in such a manner.”
The court emphasized its personal stake in the matter, stating: “We live in this city and want it to remain beautiful. Look at what Karachi used to be and what it has become today-you will understand.”
The CDA’s counsel informed the court that 12,800 Paper Mulberry trees were cut down from F-9 Park, and in their place, 40,000 new trees had been planted. He further stated that a journalist had written about the Paper Mulberry trees, following which the Prime Minister’s Office took notice. The Ministry of Climate Change had also recommended that all Paper Mulberry trees be cut down.
Justice Soomro, however, remained unconvinced. “The law of nature does not support the idea that something growing can be harmful,” he remarked. He questioned the credibility of the research used to justify the large-scale felling. What level of research was conducted to determine that these trees are harmful to human life? Only a few researches are recognized worldwide-was this among them?” the court asked.
When the CDA’s lawyer admitted he was unaware of the research’s category, the court further inquired, “Is there no agricultural university here? Did you seek any assistance from them?” The lawyer requested time to provide an answer in the next hearing.
Expressing strong displeasure, Justice Soomro stated that it is a matter of great regret. A major department like the CDA carried out this operation without any credible research. You should have involved credible environmental researchers and sought their help.”
The lawyer responded that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had been consulted. At this, the court retorted that now it will be contempt of court. If you violate orders, there will be consequences. The court is not satisfied with where you obtained this opinion on cutting trees.
The court explicitly ordered that not a single tree shall be cut. Any violation of this order will be treated as contempt of court, and any CDA officer found involved will face contempt proceedings.
Meanwhile, the petitioner’s counsel informed the court that the Ministry of Climate Change has stated it had not approved the tree-cutting operation.
Expressing dissatisfaction with the CDA’s research on the matter, the court adjourned the hearing until next Thursday.
Removal of citizen’s name from Interpol red notice
The Islamabad High Court expressed strong displeasure over the authorities’ failure to comply with court orders regarding removal of a citizen from Interpol red notice’.
A single bench comprising Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro heard a case concerning an Interpol Red Notice issued against a petitioner who had been acquitted in a case five years ago. Despite the acquittal, the petitioner’s name remained on the Red Notice.
During the proceedings, Additional Attorney General Rashid Hafeez informed the court that the petitioner’s name had been removed from the Red Notice.
However, Justice Soomro turned his attention to the conduct of senior bureaucrats who had failed to appear before the court despite earlier directives. The court had previously issued show-cause notices to the Secretary Interior and other officials for non-compliance.
Addressing the Joint Secretary Interior, who was present, Justice Soomro remarked that you are a senior officer, educated and seemingly knowledgeable. We do not want your career to be affected. It is your responsibility to comply with court orders. We are giving you one chance, and we are noting your name. If the court’s order is not complied with next time, you will be punished for contempt of court.
The judge added that we have very serious observations. These officers do not even listen to the State Counsel. The Additional Attorney General informed the court that the procedural issue regarding the Red Warrant had been resolved, and compliance with the court’s order had been ensured.
Satisfied with the compliance regarding the Red Notice, the court adjourned the hearing. However, the contempt warning to the bureaucracy remained on record.
FIA told to return seized jewellery
The Islamabad High Court directed the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to return seized jewelry to a woman within one month, observing that there is no justification for retaining the items after the completion of an inquiry. A single bench comprising Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir heard a petition filed by a citizen, Shahnaz Ashraf, regarding the alleged misuse of her jewelry by an FIA officer.
During the proceedings, the petitioner along with her counsel and FIA officials appeared before the court. Justice Tahir inquired from the FIA officials about the current status of the case.
The FIA officials informed the court that the inquiry had been completed and was now awaiting approval from the Director General. At this, Justice Tahir remarked that if the inquiry has been completed, what is the justification for still holding onto the items.
The court subsequently ordered the FIA to return the seized jewelry to the petitioner within one month. The bench adjourned the hearing of the case with these directives. The court made it clear that the retention of case property post-inquiry is not permissible under the law.