PESHAWAR, Feb 14: The NWFP subordinate judiciary services tribunal cannot claim exclusive powers to deal with the cases of subordinate judicial officers without the approval of parliament , provincial advocate-general Barrister Jehanzeb Raheem stated before the provincial assembly's law reforms committee.

It was learnt that the advocate-general, who was asked by the committee for assistance, contended that as parliament had not extended its acceptance to the formation of the said tribunal under Article 212(2) of the Constitution, therefore the tribunal could not enjoy these powers.

Some judicial officers have been filing appeals before the judiciary services tribunal under the impression that the tribunal enjoys the powers required to deal their cases.

The NWFP assembly's law reforms committee has questioned the functioning of the subordinate judiciary services tribunal on the ground that the constitutional requirements are not fulfilled before setting up the tribunal. The committee would submit its report to the assembly after completing discussion on the matter.

A member of the committee confided to Dawn that at a meeting of the body presided over by Abdul Akber Khan a few days ago, Barrister Jehanzeb Raheem adopted the stance that the tribunal did not enjoy exclusive jurisdiction and the aggrieved judicial officers had the right to move the High Court through a writ petition or to file their appeals before a civil court.

Even before the issue was taken up by the law reforms committee, the tribunal was drawing criticizm from legal circles due to lacunas in the NWFP Subordinate Judiciary Services Tribunal Act 1991, under which the tribunal was set up.

Lawyers were asking how could an appeal of a judicial officer terminated by the High Court's chief justice be heard by the tribunal comprising judges junior to the chief justice.

Another point on which the tribunal was criticized was delay in deciding appeals of judicial officers. Even normal cases pertaining to ACRs (Annual Confidential Reports) have been pending with it for years.

In June 1991, the provincial assembly passed the act aimed at establishment of a services tribunal to exercise exclusive jurisdiction regarding the matters relating to service matters of the NWFP subordinate judiciary. Prior to this act the subordinate judicial officers were treated like other civil servants as far as their service matters were concerned and they had to move the ordinary services tribunal in case of any grievances.

Under Article 212(1) of the Constitution, the appropriate legislature may by an act provides for the establishment of one or more administrative courts or tribunals to exercise exclusive jurisdiction in matters relating to the people in government service.

Barrister Jehanzeb Raheem was of the opinion that under Clause 2 of Article 212 of the Constitution, the provisions of this clause should not apply to a tribunal established under a provincial assembly act unless, at the request of that assembly made in the form of a resolution, parliament by law extends the provisions to such a tribunal.

He added that after the passage of the bill by the NWFP assembly in 1991, a resolution was sent to parliament for giving assent to the tribunal, but its acceptance was yet to be received.

Mr Raheem claimed that as parliament had not given the acceptance for extending provisions of Article 212 to the present tribunal, therefore this tribunal could not claim exclusive jurisdiction in dealing with the cases of subordinate judicial officers.