PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Saturday indefinitely adjourned the hearing of a petition challenging the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government’s decision to exclude additional advocate generals and assistant advocate generals working in the Advocate General’s Office from the definition of the “Service of Pakistan.”
A two-member bench comprising Justice Ijaz Anwar and Justice Babar Sattar observed that a related matter was currently pending before the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) and, therefore, no decision could be rendered at this stage.
The bench noted that any ruling by the high court might affect the proceedings of the case already under consideration by the FCC.
The court was hearing a writ petition filed by Nasrullah Khan through his counsel, Sultan Muhammad Khan advocate. The petitioner challenged an amendment passed by the provincial government on December 4, 2024, under which additional advocate generals and assistant advocate generals serving in the Advocate General’s Office were excluded from the definition of the “Service of Pakistan.”
The petitioner argued that the amendment was given retrospective effect from 2014 and was introduced with the sole purpose of benefiting a Member National Assembly (MNA) from Swat.
According to the petition, the lawmaker had previously served as an AAG and had resigned shortly before contesting the NA elections. The petitioner maintained that the mandatory two-year period required after leaving such a position had not elapsed before the lawmaker entered the electoral race and was subsequently elected.
The petitioner informed the court that he had filed a reference with the Speaker of the National Assembly seeking action against the lawmaker. The matter was later referred to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for further proceedings.
He pleaded that legal proceedings subsequently took place, and after an adverse decision by the Peshawar High Court, the MNA approached the Federal Constitutional Court, where the matter remains pending.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner contended that the provincial government lacked the constitutional authority to exclude additional advocate generals and assistant advocate generals from the definition of the “Service of Pakistan.” He argued that various judgments of the Supreme Court and other superior courts clearly established that such positions fall within the scope of the Service of Pakistan.
He submitted that while the AG already enjoyed a specific exemption under the law, no such exemption existed for additional or assistant advocate generals. Referring to Article 260 of the Constitution, the counsel maintained that these offices were clearly covered under the definition of the Service of Pakistan.
The petitioner alleged that the amendment was introduced to provide legal protection to a particular MNA and to extend similar benefits to all additional and assistant advocate generals serving under the provincial government. He prayed the court to strike down the amendment as unconstitutional and beyond the legislative competence of the provincial government.
On the other hand, the provincial government argued that the issue had already become the subject of proceedings before the FCC through a petition filed by the MNA in question. Government representatives maintained that any ruling by the high court at this stage could create legal complications and potentially conflict with the outcome of the constitutional proceedings. After hearing the arguments, the bench decided to adjourn the matter indefinitely.
