Federal Constitutional Court Limits High Court Powers

Federal Constitutional Court ruled that high courts have limited constitutional powers and must decide cases according to law, not emotions.

Federal Constitutional Court set aside the Sindh High Court decision. The court said the Constitution clearly limits the jurisdiction of high courts. Judges must follow the law instead of sympathy.

The court cancelled the Sindh High Court order that allowed a student to sit in a special or super supplementary exam. The court clarified that no law or regulation allows such an exam. Therefore, high courts cannot issue such orders on the basis of compassion, equality, or personal feelings.

Sympathy and Morality Cannot Replace the Law

The court stated that sympathy or morality cannot replace the law. Judges must deliver justice under legal rules. Courts cannot apply personal standards in place of the law.

The ruling said judicial decisions cannot rest on personal beliefs or political considerations. Judicial credibility depends on enforcing the law. Judges must act without fear or bias. Pakistan runs under the Constitution, not individuals. Judges serve as neutral arbiters, not private persons. Giving sympathy priority over legal duty goes against judicial office.

The court explained that high courts themselves come from the Constitution. Pakistan’s constitutional journey has always stayed within legal limits. Personal good intentions or unchecked authority do not form part of the constitutional system. Under Article 199, high courts have restricted jurisdiction. They can use only the powers given by the Constitution or law. No judicial forum can cross constitutional boundaries.

Power Of Compassion Exists Under Article 187

The court added that if any power of compassion exists under Article 187, only the Supreme Court and the Federal Constitutional Court can use it.

The case involved a student of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical University. Student missed the annual exam due to a kidney transplant, and he also missed the supplementary exam for medical reasons. He submitted two applications to the vice chancellor, but the university rejected both.

Student Approached Sindh High Court

Later, the student approached the Sindh High Court under Article 199. The high court allowed the student to take a special or super supplementary exam. However, the Federal Constitutional Court overturned that decision and said such orders fall outside legal and constitutional limits. Justice Aamir Farooq issued the detailed 18-page written judgment.

Federal Constitutional Court made it clear that courts must stay within constitutional limits and always give decisions strictly under the law.