MUZAFFARABAD: The bar associations of Muzaffarabad and Mirpur on Tuesday opposed a petition for leave to appeal (PLA) against the admission order of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) High Court regarding a writ petition challenging the contractual appointment of a retired civil servant as registrar of the AJK Supreme Court.

On February 6, Supreme Court Chief Justice Chaudhry Mohammad Ibrahim Zia appointed Sardar Rahim Khan, a retired secretary, as registrar in B-22 for three years “on the recommendation of court’s selection board.”

Three members of the Central Bar challenged the appointment in the High Court, which admitted the petition for regular hearing on March 19, directing the respondents to file their written statement(s) by March 26.

The petitioners were directed to file replication by March 29 - fixed for preliminary hearing.

However, instead of filing the statement, Mr Khan moved a PLA in the apex court through Advocate General Raza Ali Khan on March 21, seeking dismissal of the writ petition entertained by the high court.

The petitioners had arrayed Central Bar of Muzaffarabad, District Bar of Mirpur and the bar associations of AJK supreme and high courts as pro forma respondents.

Of them, the bars of Muzaffarabad and Mirpur pleaded to be included in the line of petitioners with Raja Amjad Ali and Fayyaz Janjua as their counsel, respectively. Mr Jajuna is also the counsel for the original three petitioners, he being one of them.

On Tuesday, the counsel for both sides appeared before the single-member apex court bench of ad hoc judge Sardar Abdul Hameed for their arguments on the PLA.

In a veiled criticism of hearing by the ad hoc judge, he contended that since the impugned contractual appointment had been made by the CJ, hearing of the PLA by an ad hoc judge did not fit in the standards of the high moral ground, attributed to and expected of the apex court.

The counsel also recalled that the AJK apex court had itself held in many cases that the view of the high court in any issue should be ascertained first before invoking the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

He alleged that the conduct of Mr Khan (registrar) before the high court was below the dignity of the office he was “unlawfully” occupying, as instead of defending his appointment in the high court he had filed the PLA, pre-empting an adverse decision.

Mr Janjua said there was no provision to appoint a person as registrar who did not possess mandatory 15-year legal experience and who was above 63 years of age.

Earlier, the advocate general and senior lawyer Raja Mohammad Hanif defended the PLA, stressing that leave should be granted for debate on the points agitated by both sides.

Published in Dawn, April 11th, 2018