Islamabad (Web Desk): A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court (SC) by five judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), challenging the practice of judicial transfers and their impact on the seniority of judges.
According to reports, the petition, a 49-page constitutional filing, was submitted under Article 184(3) of the Constitution through senior counsel Munir A. Malik and Barrister Salahuddin.
The petitioners argue that the President of Pakistan misused Article 200(1), which grants the authority to transfer judges, by overriding the Judicial Commission’s decisions in such matters.
The petition contends that judicial transfers cannot be carried out arbitrarily or without clear justification in the public interest.
Further, it argues that these transfers should not alter the established seniority ranking of judges within the judicial system.
The petitioners contend that Article 200 allows for temporary transfers only and that the current practice violates Article 175(A) of the Constitution.
In addition to questioning the legality of the transfers, the petitioners assert that the existing seniority list of IHC is inconsistent with the provisions of Article 194 and the Third Schedule of the Constitution.
The petition specifically takes issue with the appointment of Justice Sarfraz Dogar as the acting Chief Justice of IHC.
The petitioners argue that Justice Dogar had served in the IHC for only two weeks before assuming the administrative role, thus casting doubt on the legitimacy of his appointment.
They also urge that Justices Khalid Soomro and Muhammad Asif be disqualified from performing judicial duties, further challenging the validity of the current judicial composition at the IHC.
The respondents in the case include the President of Pakistan, the federal government, the Judicial Commission, the Supreme Court registrar, and various high court registrars.
The petitioners maintained that the failure of transferred judges to take fresh oaths further violates the Constitution and undermines the principles of judicial independence.
It argues that a judge’s seniority should be determined from the high court in which they initially took the oath, and altering this order through judicial transfers is an unconstitutional interference in the IHC’s administration.
The top court has yet to set a date for a hearing on this significant matter.
It is pertinent to mention that the petition comes on the heels of the recent appointment of Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar as acting Chief Justice of IHC, following the elevation of Justice Aamer Farooq to the Supreme Court. The petitioners have raised concerns that the appointment has led to disruptions in the IHC’s seniority structure, a move that has created reservations among some judges.
In response to the appointment, a notification from the Ministry of Law confirmed that President Asif Ali Zardari had appointed Justice Sarfraz Dogar as the acting chief justice under Article 196 of the Constitution.
His appointment took effect upon taking the oath of office and will remain in place until a permanent chief justice is appointed.