KARACHI: The Sindh High Court issued notices to the Indus River System Authority (Irsa), the secretary of the water resources division and others on a petition seeking implementation of a court order for appointing a federal member to Irsa from Sindh.
Qurban Ali Maitlo submitted in the petition that appointments made to Irsa were not being made in accordance with the law, which is a prerequisite for ensuring transparency, merit and good governance.
He submitted that Irsa was established under the Irsa Act, 1992, with the mandate to regulate and monitor the distribution of water sources of the Indus River, in accordance with the Water Accord, 1991, amongst the provinces. He said that pursuant to Section 4 of the Irsa Act, 1992, the authority comprises five members, with each province and the federal government nominating one member each.
He said that during the drought conditions of 1999-2002, which had a devastating impact on Sindh, a policy decision was taken through a chief executive order that the federal member of Irsa shall be from Sindh in order to safeguard the interests of the province, which is a lowest riparian province, and to apply the principle of proportionality as Sindh is major stakeholder of water having 42% of water share though reduced under 1991 Accord than the share provided in the Sindh-Punjab Water Agreement 1945.
Petitioner counsel Zamir Ghumro submitted that the appointment of member federal Irsa, who is not from the Sindh, is a clear violation of the policy decision and the constitutional protection afforded to it. He submitted that respondent Asjad Imtiaz Ali was appointed as the federal member of Irsa in 2019 an he had also served as an ad-hoc member of Irsa from 2010 to 2017, which shows the federal government ’s mala fide to continue with the respondent as federal member in violation of law.
He said the appointment/extension of member federal Irsa was in derogation and defiance of the executive order as well as the judgment of the SHC wherein it was held that the federal government is bound to comply with the executive order and appoint federal member Irsa from Sindh. He said the SHC judgment has also attained finality as he federal government appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court.
The counsel submitted that due to the lack of proper representation of the province on Irsa, its decisions are biased and prejudicial to the interests of Sindh.
He said that the bias is manifestly evident in its recent decision to construct the Cholistan and Thal Canal Phase-II, despite insufficient water availability in the Indus Basin. Consequently, he submitted, the very existence of the Indus Delta, which is already facing an ecological disaster characterized by seawater intrusion, loss of mangrove forests, dwindling fisheries, and saltwater contamination of freshwater sources, is at the risk.
The court was requested to direct the respondent member federal to show authority of law under which he was holding his office of federal member of Irsa, and in case of his failure to do so, issue writ of quo warranto against him declaring his office vacant forthwith.
He also sought a declaration that the decisions made by Irsa including but not limited to the Water Availability Certificate January 25, 2024 are unconstitutional and void ab initio, having been made without lawful authority and in violation of the fundamental rights of the people of Sindh and the province’s rights under the constitution and laws of Pakistan.
A division bench headed by Justice Mohammad Faisal Kamal Alam issued notices to Irsa, federal government and others and called their comments on April 7.