ISLAMABAD: A two judge division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has suspended the order of a single judge bench regarding the expulsion of Turkish teachers from the country, while hearing an intra court appeal Kled by the Pak-Turk Educational Foundation (PTEF).

The bench, made up of justices Athar Minallah and Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, suspended the order and directed the Ministry of Interior to file its reply to the PTEF appealin afortnight.

PTEF Chairman Alamgir Khan, through his counsel Babar Sattar, filed the appeal seeking directions to the federal government against adverse action against thefoundation`s expatriate employees.

A previous, detailed judgement by Justice Aamer Farooq cited eight reasons for why the PTEF`s petition seeking the same relief was dismissed.

Mr Farooq had said that permission to stay in the country, once granted, can be revoked at any time.

The judgement said that `leave to foreigners to stay in Pakistan is in the nature of concession/privilege and cannot be termed as a right to remain in the country.

It went on to say the government has the `absolute power` to give or cancel visas `without hearing or giving any reason` and such an order cannot be held without lawful authority.

Mr Sattar, however, said the interior ministry`s decision was based on extraneous political considerations, and in doing so failed to apply its mind and give due consideration to the merits of the case and the principles of equity and justice under Pakistani law.

Mr Sattar said the decision to deport the expat s and their f amilies was made to gainpolitical traction with the incumbent president of the Republic of Turkey and, in doing so the respondent blatantly disregarded the legal provisions and processes established for the writ and rule of law in the country.

It has been consistently held by superior courts that Pakistan is a constitutional democracy and that the concept of decisions being contingent on the pleasure of rulers is a remnant of colonial times when men ruled and not law, and that such appreciation of decision-making authority is of fensive to the idea of rule of law.

Mr Sattar said the impugned judgement is infirm as is evident from interim decisions on the same subject matter rendered by the Peshawar High Court, Lahore High Court and Sindh High Court, all of which have restrained the respondent ministry from expelling Turkish teachers and staff of the Pak-Turk foundation from Pakistan or taking punitive or coercive action against them.

He said that the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside as it is based on theerroneous assumption that the petition sought to challenge the existence and scope of the power vested in the state under the Foreigners Act 1946.

The petition said that the superior courts have held that public officials cannot exercise discretion conferred upon them in an unguided and arbitrary manner and have elaborated the principles for structuring discretion.

He said that the impugned judgment is untenable in law as it was passed in ignorance of the legal principle that public authorities are required to give reasons for their decisions.

Additionally, he said, since the insertion of section 24-A in the General Clauses Act, the law specifically requires public authorities and officials to give reasons for `making any order, or issuing any direction under the powers conferred by or under any enactment`.

The petition asked the court to direct the interior ministry to grant PTEF`s expatriate employees permission to stay in the country until the end of the 2016-17 academic year.