IHC asks naval chief to decide ‘controversial’ retirement case

Published
0

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed the Chief of Naval Staff to decide the controversy related to forced retirement of an officer.

Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahan­giri issued the directive while hearing the petition of a naval officer, Lieutenant Hafiz Muham­mad Habibullah, who reportedly went missing on April 12. However, it later emerged that he was in the custody of the naval authorities for disciplinary reasons.

According to the petition, the officer was inducted in Pakistan Navy, and after successful completion of his initial training from Pakistan Naval Academy, PNS Rahbar, and grant of Short Service Commission, he was transferred to PNS Zafar on Sept 11, 2019. The naval intelligence later on Sept 14, 2022 arrested him, only to be released a day later. He was again picked up on Oct 26, 2022, and was released after two days of detention. He was finally removed from service.

However, the naval authorities informed him that he has been compulsory retired.

His counsel Inamur Rahim contended before the high court that the federal government has approved compulsory resignation of the petitioner under PN Rule 11(1)(a).

Defence counsel argues only federal cabinet can compel an officer to resign or retire him from service

He contended that it is provided in Pakistan Navy Rules that only federal cabinet can compel an officer to resign by force or to retire him from service. But in the instant case, the federal cabinet did not compel the petitioner for forcible compulsory resignation; rather, it was mentioned in the impugned order that the federal cabinet has approved the same, so the meanings of the “approved” and “compelling” by the cabinet are two different actions, therefore, impug­ned order is erroneous, illegal and not tenable under the law.

He pointed out that the relevant provisions of Pakistan Navy Rules, empower the petitioner to file representation before the Chief of Naval Staff, and according to rules, the naval chief is required to make a decision on the same.

Advocate Rahim, however, argued that the petitioner had filed the representation, but the competent authority was yet to decide it. He requested the court to issue a direction to the naval chief for deciding the representation of the petitioner “expeditiously”.

Subsequently, Justice Jahangiri ruled, the “Chief of the Naval Staff is directed to decide the representation, if filed by the petitioner in accordance with laws/rules… strictly in accordance with law as well as purely on merits after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner”.

Published in Dawn, July 23th, 2023

Opinion

Editorial

Kashmir unresolved
Updated 30 Sep, 2026

Kashmir unresolved

The just solution lies in India addressing the issue through a trilateral dialogue involving the legitimate representatives of the Kashmiri people and Pakistan.
Water shortage
30 Sep, 2026

Water shortage

THAT the country is entering the Rabi season with an anticipated water shortage of nearly 25pc, the lowest carryover...
Young hearts
30 Sep, 2026

Young hearts

THE observance may have passed, but the message of World Heart Day should not fade with it. The occasion is a useful...
Terror and politics
Updated 29 Sep, 2026

Terror and politics

There is an urgent need to tone down the rhetoric and tackle terrorism as a collective challenge for both the affected provinces and the federation.
Watching the glaciers
29 Sep, 2026

Watching the glaciers

THE latest signs from Pakistan’s mountains are worrying. Suparco says the number of unfrozen glacial lakes it...
Dangerous agenda
29 Sep, 2026

Dangerous agenda

AS the world remains fixated on the US-Iran conflict, elsewhere in the Middle East, Israel is consolidating its grip...