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

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 S.6---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.201---Rules of Business, 1973, R.8(2)---Controller General of Accounts of Pakistan, administrative control and authority of---Matters pertaining to terms and conditions of service of employees of Accounts Department of Pakistan Post Office---Executive interference---Attempt to reinterpret binding judicial precedent through Cabinet Division minutes and notification---Legality and effect---Separation of powers, doctrine of---Exclusive domain of judiciary to interpret law---Executive encroachment, impermissibility of---No authority to override judicial interpretation of statutes---Binding effect of High Court judgments---Scope and enforcement---Implementation of precedents---Duty of executive to comply with binding judgments---Scope---The challenge raised in the present Constitutional petition revolved around the legality of the executive's attempt to reinterpret S. 6 of the Controller-General of Accounts (Appointment, Functions and Powers) Ordinance, 2001 (the Ordinance), despite a binding precedent of the High Court reported as (PLD 2003 Lahore 726)---The High Court had already conclusively held that exclusive administrative control, including postings, transfers, and decentralization of accounting offices, vested in the Controller General of Accounts---However, by relying on minutes of a meeting dated 16.03.2016 and subsequent Cabinet Division notification of 17.03.2016, the executive sought to override that judicial interpretation rendered in PLD 2003 Lahore 726 under the guise of Rule 8 of the Rules of Business, 1973---The core issue, therefore, was "whether the executive could lawfully sit over, reinterpret, or disregard a binding judicial precedent, thereby encroaching upon the domain of judicial authority and violating the constitutional principle of separation of powers?"---Held: Bare reading of the observations made in para 4 of order dated 25.01.2012 earlier passed by High Court in another petition led to an ineluctable conclusion that no window was available with the executive to sit over a binding decision of a Constitutional Court; such a course was a mere misconception of the observations made vide order dated 25.01.2012, which order, in essence, directed implementation of the judgment reported as PLD 2003 Lahore 726---Impugned minutes and action of according a different interpretation to S. 6 of the Ordinance than the one made by the High Court, was clearly a contraption of abuse of settled principles of separation of power embodied in the spirit and essence of the Constitution---Rule 8 of the Rules of Business, 1973 made it clear that in case of a dispute amongst two divisions, the matter could be referred to the Prime Minister or Cabinet, whereas, if a legal question was posed, involving interpretation of a statutory provision of a particular statute and such interpretation had been accorded by a Constitutional Court, having attained finality, as was the case in hand, no question of decision or interpretation by the executive branch could arise---Interpretation of S. 6 of the Ordinance, as accorded by the judgment reported as PLD 2003 Lahore 726 supra, still held the field and the same was binding precedent for all intents and purpose, consequently, impugned minutes and consequent recommendations and decision thereof notified by Cabinet Division were set aside---The respondents were directed to implement the judgment reported as PLD 2003 Lahore 726 in letter and spirit---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

AYESHA IFTIKHAR vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Finance Division, Islamabad S — 2026 PLD 17 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD