PESHAWAR, June 17: The Peshawar High Court on Monday restrained a special committee of the NWFP assembly from putting forward any recommendation or report before the provincial assembly regarding the move to remove district Kohistan’s Nazim, Maulana Obaidullah.

The high court fixed June 19 for deciding two questions: who is the chief executive of the province, the governor or the chief minister; and, whether any matter pending before the assembly could be challenged before the court.

A two-member bench of the court comprising Justice Nasirul Mulk and Justice Shehzad Akber Khan took up for hearing the writ petition filed by Maulana Obaidullah, challenging the steps taken against him by the government and the assembly.

The petitioner has also filed a contempt of court petition against the NWFP minister for local government, Sardar Idrees, and secretary local government department, Baz Mohammad, stating that they had violated the order of the high court by moving a resolution in the assembly.

The bench directed that the special committee constituted by the assembly could continue its proceedings but it should not take any further step to either putting forward any report or recommendations to the assembly or moving any resolution against the petitioner.

The bench directed the NWFP advocate general, Barrister Jehanzeb Raheem to assist the court on the issue.

Advocate Yahya Afridi appeared for the petitioner and argued that in section 23 of the Local Government Ordinance, 2001, it was specifically mentioned that only the chief executive of the province could move a resolution in the assembly for removal of a district Nazim. He argued that under article 129 of the Constitution, the governor was the chief executive and not the chief minister.

Mr Afridi argued that the governor could delegate his powers to any other authority through the Rules of Business and no such authority had been given by the governor in connection with the local bodies to the chief minister.

He argued that the entire steps taken against the petitioner were based on mala fide intentions. He added that the petitioner was not heard by the local government commission or by a two- member committee constituted by the commission, before moving a resolution in the assembly and he was kept in the dark about everything.

The advocate general, Barrister Jehanzeb Raheem, raised an objection that under Article 69 read with Article 127 of the constitution a matter pending before the assembly could not be challenged before the court. He added that the high court could restrain the assembly from taking any action against the Nazim.

Mr Afridi argued that while the issue was pending before the court and a restraining order was already issued, the government had no authority to bring the issue to the assembly.

Meanwhile, the special committee headed by Khalid Waqar Chamkani, held its meeting on Tuesday and directed the Nazim to appear before the committee on July 7.

The Nazim, Maulana Obaidullah, appeared before the committee and informed it about the proceedings in the high court. The committee observed that they would give further 19 days to the Nazim.