IHC’s verdict

Published
16

THERE are some verdicts that throw a lifeline to a nation and slow its descent into a dystopian future where justice and merit have no place. Thursday’s judgement by the Islamabad High Court on identical petitions pertaining to the Federal Government Employees Housing Authority’s allotment of plots in four sectors of Islamabad certainly counts among these.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani ruled as unconstitutional and illegal FGEHA’s revised policy whereby top judges, lawyers and bureaucrats were allotted plots on subsidised rates, and ordered the authority to develop housing schemes for the general public.

The verdict highlighted the egregious flaws in the registration process, noting the lack of transparency and flagrant conflict of interest evident therein. For example, it found the list of beneficiaries even included some judges who had been dismissed from service following disciplinary proceedings. The bench also held that the inclusion of the Supreme Court, IHC and district judiciary among the entitled groups — something they did not even request — is “not in conformity with the impartiality and independence of the judiciary as an institution”, noting that the FGEHA was a litigant before these judicial branches.

Read: IHC strikes down subsidised plots for judges, bureaucrats

According to the court, “The sole object appears to have been to extend extraordinary pecuniary benefits to a few selected senior bureaucrats and [superior court] judges… . The policy governing the scheme … [appears] to be in the nature of advancing elite capture and in disregard to the well-being and welfare of the people at large”.

It is a devastating indictment of the government’s priorities and its contempt for the principles of social justice. Indeed, this is what an extractive state looks like, where privileged segments of society fatten themselves on what should be collective resources, while ordinary citizens must scrounge for even the basics.

According to the court, the public exchequer sustained a loss of over Rs1tr as a result of the subsidised allocation of plots to select members of certain groups in four prime sectors of the capital. Then, to underscore the appalling injustice, the ruling listed the many deprivations suffered by the people of Pakistan — the want, the hunger, the disadvantages in health and education that condemn millions of our children to a future where they cannot hope to improve their lot.

Catering to the enrichment of a few at the cost of the many is what has brought the country to such a pass. With this scathing judgement, the government has no choice but to change course. It must come up with a rational policy that prioritises public interest and is executed transparently. Land allotments must be made with a view to providing shelter, not to curry favour with the powerful or to enable select individuals to make windfall gains at the cost of the state’s coffers and the country’s progress.

Published in Dawn, February 5th, 2022

Editorial

Blue wave
Updated 05 Nov, 2026

Blue wave

While Trump does not usually learn from his errors, perhaps seeing the response of the American voters he may attempt a wiser course.
New LPG policy
Updated 05 Nov, 2026

New LPG policy

If the policy is enforced effectively, it could potentially help end shortages and slash prices. But the question remains whether it will.
Polio’s other victims
05 Nov, 2026

Polio’s other victims

FOR decades, Pakistan has vowed to eradicate polio. Billions have been spent on logistics and awareness drives. Yet...
Electoral reform
Updated 04 Nov, 2026

Electoral reform

The real problem is the gulf between the statute book and what happens on polling day, not the laws.
Competing demands
04 Nov, 2026

Competing demands

THE climate crisis is becoming harder to confront as the world develops new ways to consume scarce resources. At an...
Belated meeting
Updated 04 Nov, 2026

Belated meeting

Whether it is Imran Khan, his family members, or other incarcerated political leaders and activists, the state should not deny them their rights.