KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) directed on Monday model Ayyan Ali's lawyer to submit a copy of the order passed by the Supreme Court (SC), rejecting the interior ministry's appeal to retain her name on the Exit Control List (ECL).
Headed by Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah, a two-judge bench told the lawyer to submit the copy of the apex court's order by March 3, when the matter will be taken up once again.
Ayyan had once again approached the high court to seek contempt of court proceedings against the interior secretary for allegedly not removing her name from the ECL, despite the court's declaring it 'illegal and unconstitutional.'
Advocate Lateef Khosa informed the judges that a referee judge of the high court, Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, who had examined the split judgment of a division bench on January 19, had also agreed that the placement of the petitioner's name on the ECL was illegal and unconstitutional.
He alleged in the light of the SHC's order the petitioner moved an application to the interior ministry requesting them to take her name off the ECL, as she intended to travel abroad on January 30. However, the interior ministry challenged the high court's verdict before the SC, which rejected the ministry's appeal and upheld the SHC's order.
The lawyer contended that the interior ministry's secretary was still not removing her name from the ECL, which amounted to wilfully and deliberately committing contempt of court. Therefore, it was pleaded to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the interior secretary and others concerned.
Taking up the matter on Monday, the judges asked Ayyan's lawyer to produce a copy of the SC's order, which had rejected the ministry's appeal and upheld the SHC's order. But, the lawyer failed to produce the document and requested time to submit it.
Adjourning the hearing, the bench directed him to submit the copy of the order on March 3.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 21st, 2017.
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ