SHC takes issue with Centre’s pick for Irsa, stays work on canals project – Pakistan

KARACHI: The issue of an improper appointment to the Indus River System Authority (Irsa) served as the basis for a Sindh High Court (SHC) order, which on Monday restrained the authority and others from taking any further action on the planned construction of new canals on the Indus River.

A two-judge bench comprising Justice Muh­ammad Faisal Kamal Alam and Justice Jawad Akbar Sarwana granted 10 days to respondents so they could file their comments, after the federal and provincial law officers sought more time to file para-wise comments on the behalf of respondents.

A grower from Sindh, Qurban Maitlo, had moved the SHC last mon­th against the appointment of Irsa’s Federal Member Asjad Imtiaz Ali, claiming that the appointment was made in clear violation of exi­sting policies — as well as an earlier judgement of the SHC on the matter.

Citing the secretaries of the establishment and wat­er resources divisions, the Irsa chairman, secretary of the Sindh Irrigation Dep­artment and federal member of Irsa as respondents, the petitioner also assailed the water availability certificate issued by Irsa for the construction of new canals on the Indus River.

Petitioner says incumbent federal member not appointed as per policy, or in line with prior court ruling

The petitioner had asse­r­ted that in view of the dro­ught-like conditions witnessed in Sindh during the 1999-2002 period, a policy decision was taken thro­ugh an executive order in July 2000 that the federal member of Irsa must be from Sindh, in order to safeguard the interests of the province, which was the lowest riparian.

Counsel for petitioner Barrister Zamir Ghumro emphasised that the current composition of Irsa was not in accordance with the Indus River System Authority Act, 1992 and the Executive Order issued on July 10, 2000, which was also affirmed by the SHC in an earlier judgement handed down in 2017.

The petitioner also asserted that since Irsa’s composition was illegal, it could not issue the impugned water availability certificate for the construction of Cholistan and Thal phase II canals.

In its order, the bench said that the petitioner’s contention appeared to be correct as Irsa’s federal member was suppo­sed to be from Sindh, but the incumbent was not.

The bench also noted that during the hearing, the respondents had not disputed the fact that the member in question was not from Sindh province.

“The present structure of Respondent Irsa is under serious dispute. In these circumstances, and looking at the sensitivity of the issue, the propriety demands, that Respon­dents should not take any further action and measures in pursuance of the above Water Availability Certificate dated 25.01.­2025,” the order noted.

The court also observed that Article 155 of the Constitution provided a dispute resolution mechanism, including, appointment of commission of experts.

Article 155 extends the purview of the Council of Common Interests on resolving disputes bet­ween the federation and the federating units about their rights to water from any natural source and authorises the government concerned to make a complaint. On a query from the judges, Advocate General Sindh Jawad Dero submitted that the above provision has been invoked. The hearing was then adjourned till April 18.

Contempt notices

Another SHC division bench also issued notices to the secretaries for the water resources and establishment divisions, on an application seeking contempt proceedings against them for flouting an earlier order by the SHC.

A two-judge constitutional bench, comprising Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha and Justice Adnanul Karim Memon, also directed Water Resources Secretary Ali Murtaza and Establish­ment Secretary Inamullah Dharejo to turn up on May 7, along with their replies.

Petitioner Ghulam Abbas Leghari has filed a contempt application before the SHC, submitting that he had filed a petition in 2013, on which the SHC had ruled in May 2017 that the federal member of Irsa must hail from Sindh.

However, the petitioner asserted that this judgement was disobeyed when Asjad Imtiaz Ali was appointed federal member in 2019.

Published in Dawn, April 8th, 2025