LAHORE, July 14: Already seized of a case challenging the appointment of advisers, the Lahore High Court on Friday took a serious note of induction of three more advisers to the Punjab chief minister and sought an explanation from the government .

Justice Mian Hamid Farooq directed the chief secretary to submit a report on July 20 as to what was the justification of the appointment of Syed Mawahid Husain, the brother of ruling Muslim League’s secretary-general Senator Syed Mushahid Husain, as the special assistant to the chief minister, Iqbal Ahmad Khakwani as adviser to the CM and Chaudhry Mohammad Akram as the chairman of the chief minister’s task force when the appointment of as many as 35 advisers was pending and the court had already restrained Mian Mohammad Munir and Chaudhry Akhtar Rasool from functioning as advisers.

The court also required the chief secretary to appear in person to submit a list of provincial ministers, parliamentary secretaries and advisers to the government and the chief minister.

The appointment of the advisers was challenged through a constitutional writ petition by local prayer leader Maulana Malik Shah Mohammad who primarily challenged the appointment of Mian Mohammad Munir as an adviser on the plea that he had been convicted by the Supreme Court in a contempt ofcourt case along with others, including Tariq Aziz. He submitted that no convict could be appointed in an office of profit.

His counsel advocate Sheikh Shahid Maqbool submitted that three more persons had been appointed as advisers in a situation when the court was already adjudicating the legality of the appointment of the advisers whose number had risen to 39. He submitted that the constitution did not provide for the appointment of a single adviser to a provincial government and the chief minister.

The court earlier granted the petitioner a request, made through a miscellaneous application, that Syed Mawahid Husain, Iqbal Khakwani and Chaudhry Akram be allowed to be impleaded as party to the dispute.

The court had issued notices to all the advisers to submit replies in person but most of them have so far failed in appearing in person or through counsel with a reply to the court’s show-cause notices seeking their explanation as to under which legal authority they were occupying their office.

The petitioner brought their appointment into question with the contention that Article 93 of the 1973 Constitution provided that only the president was competent to appoint five advisers in consultation with the prime minister to help him discharge his official duty. The constitution did not envisage the appointment of advisers to a provincial government or the chief minister.

The court subsequently restrained Mian Munir and Akhtar Rasool from working as advisers and directed the chief secretary that financial and administrative benefits attached to their offices should be withdrawn.