• Controversial transfers made to IHC also on the agenda; acting CJ Dogar’s promotion challenged
• JCP accused of ‘wrongfully’ considering transferred judges for elevation

ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court will take up on April 14 the appeals of Islamabad High Court’s five judges seeking resolution of the inter-se seniority.

Headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, the five-judge constitutional bench consisting of justices Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Shahid Bilal, Salahuddin Panhwar and Shakeel Ahmed will also hear petitions filed by the Karachi Bar As­­s­o­ciation (KBA) as well as the Islam­abad High Court Bar Association challenging the transfer of judges from other high courts to the IHC.

The appeals, jointly moved by senior counsel Muneer A Malik and Salahuddin Ahmad on behalf of justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Saman Rafat Imtiaz also request the apex court to declare that Acting Chief Justice of IHC Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro and Justice Muhammad Asif cannot be considered the IHC’s judges until they took the oath as justices of the high court in accordance with Article 194, read in conjunction with the Third Schedule of the Constitution.

They argued that in line with the settled law established by the Supreme Court in the cases of Aslam Awan and Farrukh Irfan, the inter-se seniority of the transferred judges should be determined from the date they took oath as justices of the IHC and consequently they will be placed lower on the seniority list than the petitioner judges.

The petitioners claimed that the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) had wrongfully considered a defective seniority list of IHC judges during its meeting of Feb 10, wherein the transferred judges were erroneously considered for elevation to the Supreme Court.

The petition further asked the court to declare that the Feb 12 notification, issued by President Asif Ali Zardari, to appoint Justice Dogar as the acting CJ of IHC was unlawful, as the judge could not have been considered a judge of IHC. Therefore, the notification should also be set aside.

New list

The petition also sought a direction that the Registrar IHC should issue a revised seniority list in accordance with the declarations made by the Supreme Court.

The petition argued that the transfer notification, seniority list and the decision on representation have been issued in violation of Article 200(1) of the Constitution since the provision only provides for a temporary transfer, for a limited time period, without affecting the inter-se seniority at the high court to which the judges were transferred.

KBA plea

The KBA in its petition, filed through senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi, regretted that the transferred judges were immediately given prominent positions, with Justice Dogar being elevated to the position of senior puisne judge, despite being 15th in seniority at the Lahore High Court.

The sudden change in seniority relegated the existing judges of the IHC, who had served for years, to lower positions.

Challenging the move, the petition argued that the transfers were not made in the public interest but were instead motivated by extraneous reasons, aimed at punishing certain judges and disrupting the functioning of the IHC.

Published in Dawn, April 8th, 2025