Judges’ intra-court transfers: Justice Mazhar questions the role of CJP

ISLAMABAD: Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar questioned the role of Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) in determination of seniority of judges transferred from one high court to other.

He asked whether it is the CJP or the president who determines the seniority.

Munir A Malik, representing Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges questioned whether the consultation with the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the chief justice of the high courts was purposive, meaningful and consensus oriented on all aspects of transfer and all its consequences.

Transfer case: Counsel for judges fails to make convincing arguments?

A five-member SC Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, heard the petitions of IHC’s five judges, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, and Karachi and Lahore Bar Associations, on Thursday.

Munir A Malik contended that relevant information regarding transfer of judges was not disclosed in the documents, submitted by the federation. He said that on 28-01-25 a letter was written by secretary Ministry of Law and Justice to the chief justices of the High Courts and the same day the approval was granted by them.

He argued that a day prior i.e. 27-01-25 to writing of letter by the law secretary, a notice for the Judicial Commission of Pakistan(JCP)’s meeting for the appointment of judges from the High Courts to the Supreme Court was issued. The expectation was that former chief justice Aamer Farooq would be elevated to the Supreme Court, and Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, transferred to IHC, would then become chief justice of the IHC.

He further argued that it was also not disclosed in the documents why out of 33 judges in the Lahore High Court (LHC) Justice Dogar, who was at No 16 in the seniority list of the LHC, was transferred to the IHC. Whether he was picked up randomly or it was premeditated act, as his date of appointment of LHC judge was earlier than the date of appointment date of senior puisne judge in the IHC.

Justice Salahuddin Panhwar inquired from the IHC judges’ lawyer whether you are only aggrieved with the transfer of Justice Dogar? Munir replied, no, saying they have challenged the transfer of other judges as well. He said well before the judges transfer there were stories in the newspapers that whether the transferred judges will take fresh oath or not?

Justice Mazhar told him that if issue of seniority is argued then there might not be any need of for discussion on oath. Munir then cited CJP’s statement, published in media regarding the seniority of transferred judges. He said the CJP, in an interaction with media recently, said the transferred judges’ seniority should be at the bottom.

At that, Justice Mazhar said these are newspaper clippings, and inquired whether this issue came up in the JCP meeting? He said the CJP in consent note has not mentioned anything about the seniority of transferred judges. He noted that in India there is combined seniority list of all the High Courts’ judges, adding in Pakistan each High Court maintain its own seniority list of judges.

Munir A Malik then contended that the seniority issue should be looked at the time of transfer. Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan asked the counsel to give example of judges transferred to IHC from other High Courts in the past.

Justice Mazhar said in many Supreme Court judgments issue of seniority of civil servants transferred from one department to others has been decided, the officer’s seniority in the department where his is transferred goes in the bottom, adding those transfers are made under the Civil Servants Law. He said in the instant matter, issue is of judges’ transfer, and issue of seniority in Justice Farrukh Irfan is completely different.

Justice Mazhar questioned whether Justice Sarfraz Dogar’s name was mentioned in the JCP for elevation to the Supreme Court or for the appointment of IHC chief justice.

The case was adjourned until May 14.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025