ISLAMABAD: The judgment of the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court on transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has been challenged.
The Lahore Bar Association, Lahore High Court Bar Association on Wednesday filed intra court appeals (ICA) against the five-judge verdict under Section 5 of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023, read with Article 184(3) of the Constitution.
The petitioners prayed that the impugned order passed by the constitutional bench dated 19-06-2025 be set aside and allow the constitution petition No27/2025.
The Constitution Bench on June 19, 2025 by majority of 3 to 2 held that transfer of judges under Article 200 is within the framework of the Constitution, and transfer (permanently or temporarily) cannot be construed as a fresh appointment.
The IHC five judges – Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangri, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad High Court Bar Associations had filed the petitions against the transfer of three judges namely, Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar from Lahore High Court (LHC), Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro from Sindh High Court (SHC), and Justice Muhammad Asif from Balochistan High Court (BHC) under Article 200 (1) of the Constitution.
The apex court without upsetting the notification of transfer of judges in the IHC remanded the matter of seniority to the President of Pakistan to determine the seniority after examining/vetting the service record of the transferee judges as soon as possible, including the question of whether the transfer is on a permanent or temporary basis.
The petitioners contended that the impugned order is against the constitution, law and all rules of fairness and thus void, without jurisdiction, coram non judice, having been passed without lawful authority and is thus of no legal effect.
They submitted that all orders passed, actions taken, notifications issued, including the determination of seniority of judges and subsequent proceedings of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) in relation to the appointment of the Chief Justice of the IHC are all void and unconstitutional and of no legal effect.
The said order and the notifications and the appointments were purportedly made in pursuance of the directions given the impugned order. It is the case of the Appellant that the impugned order is unconstitutional and void and thus all orders and actions taken in pursuance thereof are also void and unconstitutional and of no legal effect.
They stated that a constitutional document is to be read as a whole to understand the underlying constitutional values, principles and objectives.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.