PHC moved against advance schools fee
A two-member PHC bench comprising Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Khurshid Iqbal took up the writ petition for hearing filed by Abbas Khan Sangeen advocate. He made the chief minister, chief secretary, Education secretary and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Private School Regulatory Authority (PSRA) as respondents in the petition.
The petitioner argued that the collection of admission, examination, promotion and other capitation fees have been declared illegal under the PHC verdict in 2021 and subsequent notifications issued by the PSRA.
Furthermore, the schools are bound to give 20 percent concession to one of the two siblings enrolled in a same school, however, educational institutions across the province are not implementing the rules despite orders and repeated notifications from PSRA,.
The petitioner submitted that various educational institutions are fleecing the parents of school going children, requesting the court to ensure implementation on the PHC orders and PSRA Regulations 2018.
He also requested the court to issue order for refund of amount charged in an account of capitation fees, adding the schools be barred from charging fee in advance as some school are demanding advance fee ahead of summer vacations.
The court after hearing the arguments issued a notice to the concerned authority and sought a response.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
15 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Military court convicts entitled to 'file petitions'
In a landmark judgment, the Peshawar High Court (PHC) has ruled that individuals convicted by military courts had the constitutional right to file writ petitions before the High Court. The decision came as a significant blow to the federal government's stance, which had argued that such petitions were inadmissible due to the availability of alternative forums for appeal. A two-member bench comprising Justice Waqar Ahmad and Justice Sadiq Ali Memon issued the detailed verdict while hearing a petition filed by Adnan and others from Mardan, who had been convicted by military courts in connection with the May 9 incidents following the arrest of Imran Khan. The petitioners have contended that they had not been involved in the unrest that had taken place at the Mardan City police station and had been wrongfully implicated. They have pointed out that while their co-accused had been tried in anti-terrorism courts, they had been handed over to military courts without being provided an explanation or legal documentation. During the hearing, the Deputy Attorney General objected to the admissibility of the petition, arguing that the petitioners had an alternative appellate forum which they had failed to approach within the prescribed timeframe. Therefore, he claimed, the petition was time-barred and not maintainable. In response, the petitioners' counsel, Barrister Amirullah Chamkani, maintained that the Supreme Court of Pakistan had in a recent short order suggested that the federal government amend the Pakistan Army Act to formally recognize High Courts as appellate forums for military court convictions. However, the counsel pointed out, the government had failed to implement these amendments, thereby depriving the petitioners of an appellate remedy. Chamkani further argued that his clients were unaware of the charges against them, had not been provided any trial documents, and had only been informed after the lapse of the appeal period. He, therefore, contended that it was unjust to declare their petition inadmissible. The PHC, in its written order, observed that constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 could not be denied, especially in situations where no effective remedy was available to the aggrieved parties. The court ruled that the absence of any appellate forum and the lack of transparency in the trial process justified the maintainability of the writ petition. Referring to the precedent set in the Brigadier Ali case, the court noted that even the Supreme Court, while upholding military trials under the Army Act, had accepted that High Courts could exercise jurisdiction in such matters.
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
Notices in military courts convictions issued
Fateh Khan, Fazal Ghaffar and Tajir Gul had been convicted of carrying our terror attacks in the country by military courts. CREATIVE: AAMIR KHAN A two-member bench of the Peshawar High Court (PHC), comprising Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Khurshid Iqbal, has issued notices to the relevant authorities in response to appeals filed by individuals convicted by military courts in connection with the May 9 riots. The appellants hail from Bannu, Chakdara, and Balambat in Lower Dir, and their legal counsel has challenged the legality and transparency of their convictions. The appeals, filed against the sentences handed down by military courts under the Field General Court Martial (FGCM), argue that the convicts were denied a fair trial and not provided with verdict copies or related legal documents. During the hearing, the appellants were represented by Barrister Amirullah Chamkani, who told the court that the convictions and subsequent prison terms – ranging from two to 10 years – were based on allegedly unlawful trials. According to Chamkani, his clients include Rahimullah, Izzat Gul, Naik Muhammad, Khalid Nawaz, Ikramullah, Ameenullah, Saqlain Haider, Khizar Hayat, and Afaq from Bannu, who were sentenced to 10 years each. Sohrab Khan and Asadullah Durrani from Balambat received two-year terms, while Rais Ahmad and another individual named Ikramullah from Chakdara were sentenced to four years. All were charged under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) for allegedly protesting against the arrest of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan and damaging state properties, including security installations and police stations. The lawyer noted that although similar charges were faced by other protestors, many of them were tried in anti-terrorism courts and were acquitted due to lack of evidence. In contrast, the current appellants were handed over to military courts without any explanation, raising serious concerns about selective prosecution and lack of due process. He emphasized that under Pakistan's Constitution, specifically Article 10-A, every citizen is entitled to a fair trial and access to necessary legal documentation, including a written copy of the verdict. However, the appellants were neither given formal charges nor informed of the exact nature of their alleged offenses. Chamkani argued that the appellants only became aware of their sentences after the statutory period for appeal had lapsed, effectively denying them their legal right to challenge the convictions in a timely manner. Moreover, he pointed out that none of the appellants were directly named in the original FIRs; their names were added at a later stage without any disclosed basis. Despite several efforts to obtain clarity from authorities and request documentation, their concerns have been met with silence, further undermining the legitimacy of the process. Citing a recent Supreme Court observation, the counsel stressed that while military trials of civilians were upheld, the apex court maintained that such convicts must have the right to appeal. Since no appeal forum currently exists for military court convictions, he asserted that the high court has jurisdiction to hear the matter. Concluding his argument, Chamkani requested the court to declare the military court convictions null and void and to direct that the cases be tried afresh in accordance with civil laws and constitutional guarantees. After hearing the preliminary arguments, the PHC issued notices to the Secretary of Defence, the Field General Court Martial, the federal government.
Express Tribune
3 days ago
- Express Tribune
PHC defers Swati travel plea hearing
The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has deferred the hearing of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Senator Azam Swati's petition seeking removal of his name from the Passport Control List and permission to travel abroad. A two-member bench comprising Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Dr Khurshid Iqbal adjourned the case until July 29, stating that no interim relief would be granted for now. The court emphasized that granting travel permission at this stage would be equivalent to offering full relief prematurely. During the hearing, Barrister Waqar represented Swati, while Deputy Prosecutor General Muhammad Ali appeared on behalf of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), along with a representative from the Passport and Immigration Department. Barrister Waqar informed the court that Azam Swati was offloaded at Islamabad Airport despite voluntarily appearing before courts in all pending cases. He stressed that Swati has substantial assets within Pakistan and has no intention to flee the country, especially as he is also a candidate for the upcoming Senate elections in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa scheduled for July 21. The NAB prosecutor responded that a major corruption inquiry is underway involving billions of rupees. He revealed that a suspicious transaction of Rs600 million was traced to Swati from an account linked to the Kohistan land scandal. Although Swati claims the funds originated from a 2016 land sale, NAB maintains the money was transferred in 2024, raising serious concerns. The court was also told that Swati failed to provide satisfactory responses to NAB's questionnaire. Justice Asadullah questioned the rationale behind placing Swati's name on the control list based on an ongoing inquiry, not a trial. The prosecutor compared the case to the infamous Ayyan Ali case, warning that premature international travel could hinder investigations, as seen in past instances. Swati's lawyer argued that his client is cooperating fully, has appeared in cases, and previously had his name removed from the Exit Control List (ECL) by the same court. He reiterated that Swati's substantial domestic assets indicate no intent to abscond. The court was also informed that the next NAB appearance is scheduled for July 16. The immigration official clarified that names are added to the list based on recommendations from investigative agencies. Following the hearing, Azam Swati spoke to the media, stating, "If a trial can be filed against my leader and his wife, if Chaudhry Zahoor Elahi could be accused of cattle theft, then surely I can be tried for selling my own home."
