AYESHA IFTIKHAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Finance Division, Islamabad Scope

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

AYESHA IFTIKHAR VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Finance Division, Islamabad Scope---To interpret law is the exclusive judicial sphere and once an interpretation is rendered, the same is final---At first sight, the protection which an entrench separation of powers might afford, finality seems obvious and uncontroversial; that is, an absolute protection against interference by executive branch, intolerant of exception or qualification---This is not to deny the inherent jurisdiction in the courts themselves to reopen or revise final judgments in certain very limited circumstances, a jurisdiction, of course, which is perfectly consistent with the separation of powers because it is the judicial branch itself which is exercising this discretion, not the non-judicial branches---The interference in afinal judgment by the legislature also has definite circumspections---Constitutional limitations on legislative competence over final judgments have clear civil liberties implications, in particular, the objective that legal disputes be resolved by adjudication according to law by independent judges 'free from potential domination by the legislative and executive branches of government, and that the fruits of litigation are not denied to a successful litigant---The Rule of Law implications are also obvious in these circumstances---Prima facie, the protection of final judgments must constitute abasic minimum protection afforded by the separation of powers, even if it were to protect nothing else---One thing is settled: there is no scope of any authority of the executive to ignore a binding judgment of a Constitutional Court---Three organs have to act within the bounds specified in the Constitution, any transgression or encroachment by one organ over the sphere of the other will result in chaos and uncertainty---It is, therefore, paramount that an equilibrium is to be maintained inter se between the three organs of the State within the limits delineated by the Constitution---Separation of power does not only mean that Judges are independent; it also means that judiciary would effectively yield the power to review the legality, and eventually the constitutionality of the acts of other public and private power.

AYESHA IFTIKHAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Finance Division, Islamabad Scope — 2026 PLC(CS) 188 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLC