TERENCE J SIGAMONY

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Thursday restored the local governments in Punjab and declared Section 3 of the Punjab Local Government Act, 2019, ultra vires of the Constitution.

The short order said: “Section 3 of the Punjab Local Government Act, 2019 where the Local Bodies were dissolved is ultra vires of the Constitution and ultimately the LGs in Punjab are restored.”

The tenure of LGs in Punjab will expire in December 2021.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, heard the petitions of the members of the Local Government of Sahiwal Municipal Corporation, Lodhran Municipal Committee, and the Faisalabad Municipal Corporation.

They were elected in the elections held under the Punjab Local Government Act, 2013 (PLGA 2013).

The petitioners had challenged the PLGA 2019 under Article 184(3) of Constitution and had prayed before the apex court to declare the Act 2019 contrary to Article 140-A and 8, 17, 32 and Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution.

The PTI government on 04-05-2019 promulgated the Punjab Local Government Act, 2019, and repealed the PLGA 2013 and removed the petitioners from their offices.

The Local Governments under Section 3 of the Act were kept in abeyance for one year.

During the proceeding, the chief justice said the local government representatives were elected for five years and their tenure cannot be cut short through a notification.

He further said that laws can be made under Article 140-A but those cannot be used to abolish the LGs.

The chief justice stated that the government holds a certain stature, be it federal, provincial or local, adding that the law can only alter powers or improve infrastructure of the government institutions.

Justice Ijazul Hassan observed that the Punjab government, after promulgation of PLGA Act 2019 announced that the elections for LBs held in six months.

He said later on the time period for holding LBs polls in the Punjab were extended to 21 months, adding now the provincial government was linking it (the polls) with the Council of Common Interest.

He said the government was contradicting itself by wanting to take the power to the lower level, and then abolishing the power itself.

The CJP inquired from the additional advocate general Punjab under which the local bodies were abolished.

He also asked why the bodies had still not been restored.

The AAG Punjab, Qasim Chohan, replied that the provincial government was ready to hold LBs polls but those were delayed due to the ongoing Covid-19 outbreak in the country.

Upon that Justice Ijaz observed that despite the Covid-19, elections were held in Gilgit-Baltistan.

The AAG informed that the matter related to holding LGs elections was pending before the CCI.

The chief justice questioned whether the LBs elections were being held in the other provinces.

The Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP), Khalid Jawed Khan, said the provinces had objections on population census.

He said that the CCI meeting had to be held on 24th March but due to the prime minister, who contracted coronavirus, now the meeting was scheduled for April 7.

The chief justice asked the AGP that they record his statement that the LGs elections in all the provinces would be held in May.

The petitioners’ counsel apprised the bench that after dissolving the LGs in the Punjab, the provincial government promised to hold new elections after one year.

He said, later on, the Punjab government promulgated PLGA 2019.

The counsel said that his clients had challenged Section 3 of the Act 2019.

The Punjab government in its reply, submitted before the apex court, justified its decision to dissolve the local governments of the country’s most populous province before expiry of their term in May 2019.

“The purpose of dissolution of the previous local governments was to ensure a level playing field for all prospective candidates in the upcoming elections under the 2019 [LG] Act… “[The government wanted] to eliminate political influence of any kind; there was no other way that political parity could be achieved in such context,” the provincial government said in its reply submitted in the Supreme Court.

The reply said the right of the local governments to enjoy a complete term of five years was subject to any other provision of the act.

It said the relevant provision in the PLGA 2013, controlling the provision of Section 30(1) was contained in Section 146 of the PLGA-2013.

“[It said] the government may, subject to such conditions as may be specified, delegate any of its functions under this Act to an officer subordinate to it except the power to make rules, to suspend or remove a mayor or chairman or to dissolve the local governments.”