The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday has allowed Punjab Advocate General Ahmad Awais to continue working as Advocate General Punjab and also sought a written reply from all the concerned parties including the Chief Secretary. LHC Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti was hearing a petition filed by Ahmad Awais challenging the notification of the Punjab government which stopped him from doing his job. “When it comes to the advocate general, the court always stands by the AG”, the judge declared. The Lahore High Court asked Additional Advocate General Punjab under which law you were appointed to the post of Advocate General.
On this, Mr Yaqoob said that it was an internal mechanism through which he was given the responsibilities.
The CJ wondered how on earth the law secretary could assign him this charge.
Mr Yaqoob, however, told the court that Mr Awais was still the advocate general “but my clients do not repose confidence in him”.
Irked by his reply, the chief justice told him off saying that his job was only to decide which law officer would appear before the court and who would not appear before the court.
“You cannot make a fuss at the Advocate General Office nor can you order for withdrawal of security from the AG house,” CJ Bhatti told Mr Yaqoob.
The AAG contended that Advocate General Awais did not consider the interests of the Punjab government.
Mr Chohan told the court that Mr Awais was forcefully removed from his office and his security was withdrawn.
Visibly annoyed by this, the chief justice asked the AAG to get a written reply from all concerned secretaries that AG Ahmad would be having all facilities and no benefit that came with the job would be withdrawn.
Following the orders of the High Court, Advocate General Punjab Ahmed Owais took charge of the office and announced action against IG Punjab and CCPO.
Chief Justice of Lahore High Court remarked that “make this system good, let it run, you will also face tomorrow. The court allowed Advocate General Punjab Ahmed Awais to continue his work and sought reply from the parties.”INP
