A single bench comprising Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi ordered the ruling party’s counsel to submit its reply within a week.
The directions came in response to an application filed by of the Pakistan Muslim League–Quaid (PML-Q)’s Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain requesting the IHC to issue an order to produce documents, undertakings and all other agreements between the premier, the then military government and Saudi Arabia since they were crucial to resolve the issue of PML House located on Margalla Road in Islamabad.
The court noted that the plaintiff’s counsel, Qausain Faisal Mufti, had verbally opposed granting the application but a formal reply has yet to be submitted in this regard.
Subsequently, the court said that the counsel was required to submit the reply within a week.
In the application, Shujaat through his counsel Sardar Abdul Raziq Khan had stated that the petitioner had filed an application for a copy of the documents but the registrar office of the Supreme Court refused it on the ground that the petitioner was not a party to the proceedings in that case.
He, therefore, asked the IHC to summon the documents pertaining to affidavits and undertakings of Nawaz Sharif and Shahbaz Sharif from the registrar office of the SC.
Since 2010, the PML-N has been trying to regain control of the PML House, located on Margalla road, from its breakaway faction by legal means. The party is also trying to claim rent for the period it remained under ‘occupation’ of PML-Q.
In financial statements submitted to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) before the 2013 general elections, PML-N had shown the house in the list of the party’s assets even though it did not have possession of the building. Curiously, the PML-Q too had listed thebuilding as part of its assets.
The PML-Q had established its office in the building before the 2002 elections, when Nawaz Sharif was living in exile in Saudi Arabia.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 5th, 2016.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ