IKHLAQ HAIDER CHATTHA vs CARETAKER CHIEF MINISTER PUNJAB arts — 2025 PLD 51 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

IKHLAQ HAIDER CHATTHA VS CARETAKER CHIEF MINISTER PUNJAB arts. 218, 219 & 220---Elections act (XXXIII of 2017), S.230---Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP)---Decision making process undertaken by the Caretaker Cabinet---Role of ECP---Scope---It is the duty of ECP to organize and conduct the election and to make such arrangements as are necessary to ensure that the election is conducted honestly, justly and fairly---Cumulative reading of arts.218, 219 & 220 of the Constitution read with S.230 of the act-2017 shows that ECP exercises an overarching power over a Caretaker Cabinet during the time it is in place and whose sole object is to assist ECP to hold elections in accordance with law---No other role has been envisaged either by the Constitution or the law to inhere in a Caretaker Cabinet---ECP has to engage proactively with a Caretaker Cabinet to supervise and oversee the decision-making process by a Caretaker Cabinet on its own volition and without instigation by the superior courts---Constitution vests enormous powers in ECP to do so and under art.220 of the Constitution it is the duty of all executive parties in the Federation and in the Provinces to assist ECP in the discharge of its functions, thus, ECP has to keep a close eye on all decisions being taken by a Caretaker Cabinet and to correct them if the Caretaker Cabinet falls outside its jurisdiction in any manner or takes decisions which infringe the mandate of S.230 of the act, 2017---Transgression of powers by the Caretake Cabinet is impermissible---Election Commission of Pakistan must come alive to its duty to rein in on the Caretaker Cabinet if it is found to be disloyal to its mandate and primary role. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 51 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case IKHLAQ HAIDER CHATTHA VS CARETAKER CHIEF MINISTER PUNJAB S. 230---Label "Caretaker"---Denotation---Powers of "Elected Cabinet" and "Caretaker Cabinet"---Scope and extent---Label "Care-taker" merely denotes a cabinet for a short duration constituted under peculiar circumstances and to fulfil a constitutional mandate---Distinction between the Elected Cabinet and a Caretaker Cabinet does not lie in the use of powers under the Constitution or the laws but in making decisions while using those powers and which must be limited to the purpose underlying their establishment, thus, although Caretaker Cabinets exercise the same range of powers, their actions and decisions must comport with and not detract from their primary role as tenants of a regime infused with the exalted and core ingredients of neutrality and impartiality---Every power has legal limits and the powers of a Caretaker Cabinet are more limited than an elected cabinet---Section 230 of the Elections Act, 2017, is an expression of the need to fence the decision-making powers of a Caretaker Cabinet and this concept is wedded to the notion of a Caretaker Cabinet which is obliged to act compatibly with the role assigned to it and to remain within the confines of its statutory powers. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 51 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case IKHLAQ HAIDER CHATTHA VS CARETAKER CHIEF MINISTER PUNJAB S.230(2)(a)---Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.6---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 224---Caretaker Government/Cabinet---Functions, mandate and primary role---Interference by the Caretaker Cabinet in major policy decisions taken by the elected Government---Effect---Notification issued by elected Government qua creation of new district Wazirabad in Gujrat Division was suspended through subsequent notification issued by the Governor pursuant to decision taken by the Caretaker Cabinet after dissolution of Provincial Assembly of Punjab---Validity---Notification issued by an elected government creating a new district of Wazirabad could not have been suspended by the Caretaker Government as it was tantamount to taking a major policy decision on an issue which was not an urgent matter within the contemplation of S.230(2)(a) of the Elections Act, 2017 (Act, 2017) and it also had the unpalatable effect to influence the elections and adversely affect the free and fair elections---Notification issued by Caretaker Government was liable to generate controversy and was certainly not an activity of a routine nature to be within the competence of the Caretaker Government and it did not spell out any reasonable objective which prompted the Caretaker Cabinet to take such decision which was clearly beyond the scope of the armoury of powers of the Caretaker Cabinet and cast doubt on the purpose for which the decision was taken---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

IKHLAQ HAIDER CHATTHA vs CARETAKER CHIEF MINISTER PUNJAB arts — 2025 PLD 51 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD