‘Even interim orders can’t be passed unilaterally’

The apex court has noted that it does not interfere in the interim orders of the high courts until and unless an interim order is passed in violation of the law.

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court made this observation on Friday while hearing the federal government’s appeal against the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) order to stay the government’s decision to transfer two Faisalabad Electric Supply Company’s (Fesco) officials including its caretaker CEO.

 According to some media reports, services of Fesco CEO Shafiqul Hasan and chief engineer (CE) were surrendered to the Pakistan Electric Supply Company (Pepco) on August 28 allegedly due to political interference of some ruling party lawmakers.

The CEO and the CE had later moved the LHC contending the government had issued orders for their transfer without giving them an opportunity of personal hearing. The LHC on September 10 stayed the transfer of the officials. The government had later moved the apex court against the LHC order.

Taking up the appeal on Friday, a bench – presided by Justice Umar Ata Bandail – expressed concern over the LHC order and noted that a high court can only issue stay orders after hearing both parties.

The judge noted that in this case, some news reports were published in the media with regard to alleged political interference of some legislators. These reports were obviously not published by the government, he added.

"The Supreme Court intervenes only if there is a serious violation of the law or if a high court transgresses its jurisdiction. The powers of the judiciary can only be exercised under certain principles. In this case, a unilateral order was issued against the order of the government," said Justice Bandial.

The bench later asked the LHC to decide the matter within a week. “The stay order will be considered null and void after a week, and the CEO will report back to his old company,” it noted.

The Supreme Court later disposed of the federal government's plea.