Monday, September 19, 2022
A day prior, PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry had filed a petition against the appointment of Durrani.
During the hearing, Fawad's lawyer Faisal Chaudhry argued that Durrani’s appointment was in contravention of Article 2016.
To this, Chief Justice IHC Athar Minallah emphasised it was a constitutional appointment and questioned how could a member be removed like this.
Justice Minallah made it clear that the court was "bound to rule in the light of the Constitution" and it would "not meddle in any matter unnecessarily."
“We wouldn’t interfere in any way that gives rise to a Constitutional controversy.”
Asking the petitioner’s counsel to go through the relevant clauses once again, the IHC chief justice said in this case, the Constitution was not only providing a forum but also prescribing a procedure.
The lawyer, in his counterargument, said Durrani’s case was rather different and it would apply only where there was misconduct.
The IHC, however, stressed this appointment was made after meeting all the constitutional requirements, thus, Durrani could only be removed in the very same way.
The court further said PTI was also a part of this appointment by the time it was made. “This appointment was carried out by the then Parliamentary Committee and it was mandatory for this court to implement the Constitution in letter and spirit,” the chief justice said.