The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a report on the recruitment of 60 inspectors in the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and directed Director General Wajid Zia to decide on the court’s order instead of the presidential one.
The inspectors in question were recruited in 1990 during the tenure of the Pakistan Peoples Party and sacked by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz government in 1996.
The matter went to the courts and on February 21, 2001, the Supreme Court directed the FIA to conduct their Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC) test.
In 2010, the PPP government, under a presidential order, reinstated the sacked employees of all government departments, including the FIA. In 2016, a contempt of court plea was filed in the SC.
The apex court had directed the FIA to conduct the FPSC tests of the inspectors within two years.
The complainant, Dr Shafiqur Rahman, told The Express Tribune that of the 60 inspectors, only one had cleared the FPSC test. “Farooq Latif, who had passed the test, has expired,” Latif said.
A division bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, on Tuesday heard the contempt petition.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Gulzar came down hard on the DG Zia. “If you did everything under a presidential order, then where did the court order go? You recruited all the people against the court order,” the CJ remarked.
CJ Gulzar reprimanded FIA DG Wajid Zia, saying that he should decide whether to abide by the court order or the presidential order.
“If the FIA DG has to serve the president, go and do it and if you want to serve the law, then enforce the court decision,” an irked CJ told the DG.
The chief justice directed the lawyer and the FIA DG to sit down and reconsider the entire decision.
“Mr DG, look at the decision once again and submit the report.”
Justice Ijazul Ahsan asked the FIA to implement the decision of the Supreme Court.
The court then rejected the FIA's implementation report on 60 inspectors recruited in 1990 and directed the FIA to submit a new implementation report within a week.
The case was adjourned for a week.
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