KARACHI: The Sindh High Court on Friday extended its earlier interim order about suspension of a declaration of Karachi University’s syndicate cancelling the law degree of Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri of the Islamabad High Court.

A two-judge bench of SHC headed by Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro stated that the interim order would continue till Nov 27 after federal and provincial law officers again sought more time to file comments.

Citing the federation through cabinet secretary, Sindh universities & boards department, KU and others as respondents, Justice Jahangiri had petitioned the SHC and impugned the decisions of the unfair means committee (UFM) and Syndicate cancelling his degree in August last year.

On Oct 3, the SHC had issued an interim order suspending both the impugned decisions till today.

When the petition came up for hearing on Friday, additional attorney general and an assistant advocate general again requested time to file comments.

Thereafter, the bench extended its interim order, passed at last hearing, and directed them to file comments/replies by the next hearing.

“Learned additional attorney general and assistant advocate general seek time to file comments. Adjourned to 27.11.2025. Interim order passed earlier to continue till next date of hearing”, the bench in its order said.

Earlier, Justice Jahangiri in his petition submitted that the impugned decision of UFM was shocking and surprising, as nothing had been disclosed in it as to why the case of his law was taken up after 32 years, and no notice was issued to the petitioner to respond to such allegations.

He also contended that under the rules, UFM has to be appointed by the syndicate of the varsity, which has never appointed such a committee and therefore, the impugned decision of UFM is clearly without jurisdiction.

“The general context within which the illegal and malafide cancellation of the LLB degree of the petitioner has taken place is the unflinching judicial independence shown by the petitioner”, he maintained.

The petitioner further submitted that he was one of the judges appointed as an election tribunal for the federal capital and his appointment was rigorously and consistently opposed by the winning candidates of the ruling party of the country, which led to the transfer of cases to other tribunals in June last year.

Justice Jahangiri maintained that when an attempted campaign to subvert the judicial independence of the petitioner by filing a frivolous complaint before the SJC had failed, apparently a new strategy was adopted by malafidely and illegally misusing the process and institutions on the basis of impugned actions.

Published in Dawn, October 25th, 2025