"Any action taken prior to the passing of the interim order shall remain protected unless specifically reversed by the apex court," Shehryar Kasuri. PHOTO: EXPRESS/FILE
As the chairmanship crisis continues to engulf the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), a straight-forward solution for the dilemma seems out of reach at the moment.
With just three days to go before the Supreme Court (SC) hearing on the appeal by the Inter-Provincial Co-ordination ministry (IPC), Najam Sethi and Zaka Ashraf’s legal advisors have come up with different interpretations of the May 21 stay order by the apex court.
The order, announced by a three-member bench of the SC states verbatim, “We have heard the learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents for May 27, 2014. Till then, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain suspended.”
‘IPC has misinterpreted the SC order’
Shehryar Kasuri, the legal advisor for Ashraf – who was reinstated by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) – claims that the SC order has been misinterpreted by the IPC.
“Whenever the operation of a judgement is suspended by an interim order, it means that (a) the judgment of the High Court is holding field as it has not been set aside (b) only the operation of the said judgement has been suspended/stayed from the date of the order from May 21 the High Court judgement will remain stayed and the status quo will be maintained.
“Thus, any action taken prior to the passing of the interim order shall remain protected unless specifically reversed by the apex court; the same is not the case in the PCB.”
Kasuri added, “It is thus that the assumption of office of the Chairman PCB by Mr Sethi is based on misinterpretation of the interim order of the SC by the IPC ministry”.
Pre-IHC judgement situation still exists: Asma
On the other hand, IPC’s lawyer Asma Jahangir told The Express Tribune that the ministry asked Sethi to resume office after carefully studying the SC order.
“The IHC through its judgment dated 17-05-2014 annulled the SRO dated 10th February 2014 through which PCB was superseded and a Management Committee [MC] was appointed,” said Asma.
“As a consequence, Ashraf claimed to be restored since the appointment of MC was set-aside.
“It is interesting to note that before the IHC, the terminated employees of the PCB were in principle seeking their reinstatement and additionally attacked the SRO. Mr Ashraf had not even filed a writ petition.”
“The order by the SC means that the situation reverts as it was prior to the High Court judgment.”
Published in The Express Tribune, May 25th, 2014.
Like Sports on Facebook, follow @ETribuneSports on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.
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