The FCC has ruled that high courts can examine the legality of administrative actions but cannot ordinarily assume the executive's role by dictating decisions on postings, duties and disciplinary proceedings against government employees. Setting aside a Sindh High Court (SHC) order concerning police officer Munir Samo, the FCC held that judicial review under Article 199 of the Constitution was meant to correct unlawful actions and ensure compliance with the law, not to take over administrative decision-making powers. The court converted Samo's petition into an appeal and allowed it, declaring unlawful the SHC's June 30, 2026 order issued at its Larkana circuit. Justice Rozi Khan Barrech authored the 10-page judgment. A two-member bench comprising Justice Barrech and Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah heard the matter. The high court had directed that Samo be immediately removed from the Special Branch, kept in Karachi for one year and barred from operational or field duties. It had also ordered disciplinary proceedings against him and directed the authorities to report back to the court. The FCC observed that an inquiry conducted on the SHC's directions had not established Samo's alleged involvement in a raid. His role as a group officer was found to be limited to issuing intelligence reports, and the inquiry officer had not recommended action against him at that stage. The high court, however, expressed dissatisfaction with the initial inquiry and directed the Larkana senior superintendent of police to conduct another investigation. The purpose of the second inquiry was to ensure a fair, impartial and comprehensive assessment of the allegations. According to the FCC, the high court did not adequately consider the significant findings of the subsequent inquiry while issuing directions against the officer. The judgment described the disregard of findings from an inquiry ordered by the court itself as an important legal issue. The court held that adverse administrative or disciplinary action against a public servant must be supported by the record and inquiry findings. Constitutional jurisdiction, it added, could not be exercised on the basis of speculation, assumptions or grounds unrelated to the available evidence. The FCC noted that the high court's directions went beyond requiring the authorities to act in accordance with the law. Instead, the court had itself determined Samo's posting, restricted his duties and prescribed the nature of disciplinary action against him. In the circumstances, the judgment concluded, the SHC had exceeded the permissible limits of judicial review. The FCC underscored that the Constitution rests on a division of powers among the legislature, executive and judiciary. The legislature makes laws, the executive implements them, and the judiciary interprets the law. No state institution, it said, could encroach upon the constitutionally assigned domain of another. Policy formulation, rules of procedure and routine administrative matters fall within the executive's domain, the judgment stated. Judicial review allows courts to examine administrative decisions for legality but does not ordinarily authorise them to substitute their own decisions for those of the competent authorities.