LAHORE, Jan 27: The three-year extension in the retirement age of the superior courts’ judges was challenged before the Supreme Court on Monday.
The judges of superior courts were given a three-year extension on Jan 1, 2003, through amendments introduced through the Legal Framework Order.
The retirement age of the judges of high courts had been enhanced from 62 to 65 years. The Supreme Court judges will now retire at the age of 68 years.
Watan Party president Barrister Zafarullah, while challenging the extension under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, submitted that the retirement age could not be enhanced through the LFO which itself was ultra vires.
He argued that the retirement age extension for judges was violative of the 1973 Constitution since in Pakistan the retirement age for both the private and government owned departments’ employees was 60. This amendment could prejudice the rights of those bound to retire at the age of 60.
It was further argued that all the district and sessions judges (DSJs) serving the subordinate courts were likely to suffer in this regard as well since their retirement age was still 60 years. If the grant of three-year extension was not withdrawn, most of the DSJs would not be able to be elevated to the high courts.
The court was prayed to declare the enhancement in superior courts’ judges as void.
NOTICE: An election tribunal issued notice to MNA Farid Ahmad Piracha on a petition seeking his disqualification as a member of the National Assembly.
PPP’s candidate Aurangzeb Burki alleged in his petition that Mr Piracha had secured victory from NA-121 (Lahore-IV) by using unfair means.
Mr Burki alleged that the election results were rigged and Mr Piracha was declared successful on a bogus lead.
MEETING: The newly-elected vice-chairman of the Punjab Bar Council, Muhammad Arif Chaudhry, called on the chief justice of the Lahore High Court on Monday.
Talking to newsmen after the meeting, the PBS vice-chairman said he had urged the CJ to motivate the judiciary to make fair and impartial decisions.
He said lawyers associations would definitely play their due role if the judiciary did not serve the public instead of the establishment.