PROVINCE OF SINDH and another vs Messrs PEOPLES LABOUR UNION C.B.A. OF THE KARACHI WATER AND SEWERAGE BOARD
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an interlocutory order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh. The underlying Constitutional petition challenged the privatization of the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board, an entity responsible for water supply and sewerage in Karachi. The petitioners contended that the High Court, while passing an interim order, had expressed strong observations that effectively prejudged the merits of the main Constitutional petition, specifically regarding the potential for the service to fall into 'alien hands' detrimental to national interest. Upon review, the Supreme Court declined to recall the interim order but determined that the specific observations made by the High Court were inappropriate at the interlocutory stage as they could prejudice the petitioners during the final hearing. Consequently, the Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal, modified the interim order by expunging the prejudicial remarks, and directed the High Court to dispose of the pending Constitutional petition within six months.
- Can a court make definitive observations on the merits of a case while deciding an interlocutory application?
- Is it appropriate for an interim order to contain remarks that may prejudice the final adjudication of a Constitutional petition?
- Does the Supreme Court have the authority to expunge prejudicial remarks from an interlocutory order of the High Court?
1. ' AJMAL MIAN, C.J.---This petition is directed against an interlocutory order dated 4-3-1998 passed by a learned Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh in Constitution Petition No, D-2007 of 1997 filed by respondent No, 1 against inter alia the present petitioners challenging their action to privatise petitioner No,2, which is entrusted with the function of supply of water and removal of sewerage in the city of Karachi. Alongwith the above Constitutional petition a Miscellaneous Application No,5303 of 1997 was filed, upon which the impugned order was passed.
2. ' In support of the above petition Mr. Muhammad Ali Syed, learned counsel for the petitioners, has vehemently contended that the learned Judges of the Division Bench have expressed their views in very strong words and, in fact, have decided the writ petition by observing as follows: "Such order we have passed because, apparently, there is every potential in the privatisation scheme that such vital service, as is being rendered by the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board, be in the process of falling into alien hands, obviously detrimental to the national interest of Pakistan."
3. We are not inclined to recall the interim order but we would omit the above portion of the order as the same may prejudice the petitioners at the time of regular hearing of the Constitutional petition.
4. We, therefore, convert the above petition into appeal and modify the above interim order as above.
5. There will be no order as to costs.
6. ' The Constitutional petition pending in the High Court may be disposed of within six months.