The Sindh High Court (SHC) expressed its displeasure over the conduct of various government functionaries for non-compliance of the court's orders and observed that they should realise their duties and abide by the orders as long as they hold the government offices.
The bench, headed by the Chief Justice Maqbool Baqar, observed that 'the conduct of the various government functionaries, as is being exhibited in different cases, forces us to believe that neither are they willing to discharge their duties and functions properly nor do they have the capacity to do that.'
The two-judges remarked, however, that 'they should realise that as long as they are holding government offices, they are required to fulfill their duties to the best of their ability and to comply with the court's orders.'
These observations came when the secretary of the provincial forest department and the chief conservator of forests failed to file their replies, as sought by the court on September 2.
On the last hearing, the bench had directed the forest secretary and the chief conservator for forests to submit their comments, explaining to what extent they had implemented the court's judgment delivered on March 10, 2011 to end the ruthless cutting of forests in different parts of the province to lease their lands under the controversial state policy of industrialisation.
On Thursday, neither the secretary nor the conservator had filed their comments.
CJ Maqbool Baqar granted three weeks to both the officials for filing detailed and comprehensive comments, meeting all the queries raised in the September 2 order and containing all other relevant details, information, particulars and data, relevant to the issues involved in the petition.
Adjourning the hearing till November 5, the bench directed the government law officer to communicate the order to the chief secretary to ensure compliance of the same by the next date of hearing.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 26th, 2014.
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