Bench says questions raised by Ahmad Dusuki Abd Rani are fact-centric and do not meet the threshold for leave to appeal.

A three-member Federal Court bench chaired by Justice Nordin Hassan refused Ahmad Dusuki Abd Rani leave to appeal a Court of Appeal decision upholding the High Court’s finding.
Nordin, who sat with Justices Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera and P Ravinthran, said the three legal questions posed by Dusuki did not meet the threshold under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.
He said the questions were fact-centric and did not raise issues of public importance.
However, the bench spared Dusuki, a former Selangor PAS Ulama council committee member, from paying costs to the respondents, namely the Selangor religious council and the state tauliah committee.
Jamil Yaacob and Ashok K Raman appeared for Dusuki while Arham Rahimy Hariri represented the respondents.
On Feb 26, a three-member Court of Appeal bench chaired by Justice Zaini Mazlan said the courts could not substitute their own decision for that of a public authority in matters involving discretion.
Zaini said Dusuki had not identified any statutory provision imposing a mandatory duty on the council to reinstate his expired “tauliah”.
The judge also said Dusuki had not established a legal right to the automatic renewal of his “tauliah”, and that the mandamus order he sought would allow him to secure an extension without making a fresh application.
He said the High Court committed no error warranting appellate interference.
Dusuki was issued a “tauliah” to preach in Selangor by the state religious council and tauliah committee. It was revoked on March 3, 2022, although it was due to expire only on June 30, 2023.
Dusuki filed a judicial review application in the Shah Alam High Court challenging the revocation and seeking an order compelling the respondents to extend the “tauliah” beyond its expiry date.
He also sought damages and a declaration that the respondents could not restrain him from preaching in the state because of his involvement in politics.
On Oct 5, 2023, the High Court quashed the revocation, ruling it was null and void.
However, the High Court refused to extend the “tauliah” beyond its stated expiry date or grant the declaration sought, giving rise to the present appeal. - FMT

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.