FCC lacks jurisdiction to hear appeals against SC judgements, says lawyer
ISLAMABAD: It was submitted before the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) that it has no jurisdiction to hear appeals against the judgments passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
A six-judge bench, headed by Amin-ud-Din Khan, and comprising Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Justice Rozi Khan Barrech, and Justice Arshad Hussain Shah, on Monday, heard an appeal regarding the appointment of permanent vice-chancellors in public sector universities across the country.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by former Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, had passed a judgment in May last year in a petition filed by All Public Universities BPS Teachers Association under Article 184(3) of 1973 Constitution for ensuring that the applicable federal laws, provincial laws and the statutes of public sector universities are complied with in these appointments.
According to the petition, the appointments be made to all tenured positions in the universities as prescribed in their respective laws, including those of Vice-Chancellors, Registrars, Directors-General, Deans, Treasurers/Directors of Finance, Controllers of Examinations, Chairpersons and others specified therein, and this must be done transparently and on merit, by stipulating their respective criteria and inviting appointments through their respective websites and advertisements.
It also said, “Vacant tenured positions must not be held for more than six months on acting-charge-basis, and such temporary charge be given to that person who is specified in the applicable law and, in the absence thereof, a person of equivalent seniority, failing which to the person next in seniority.”
The judgment directed “The Federal Ministries of Education, Science and Technology and Defence, the Provincial Ministries of Education, the HEC and the HEDs of the Provinces must collate requisite information about the universities under their respective jurisdictions, and periodically check if they are compliant with their respective laws. Such information should be made publicly accessible on their websites.”
During the proceedings before the FCC, advocate Ibad-ur-Rehman Lodhi, representing Professor Dr Engineer Akhtar Ali Malik, former Vice-Chancellor of the National Institute of Engineering, Multan, argued that after that judgment, the authorities proceeded against his client. Thus, he filed an appeal before the Supreme Court under Section 5 of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023.
Justice K K Agha observed that after the enactment of the 27th Amendment, there is no Article 184(3) in the constitution, adding that they were dealing with the constitutional provisions standing today.
Lodhi contended that when the petition was filed, at that time Article 184 was part of the constitution. He said an appeal against the apex court’s judgment should be heard by the Supreme Court bench as per Section 5 of the Act, 2023.
Justice Najafi said neither the FCC nor the Supreme Court has suo motu power as Article 184(3) has been omitted in the 27th Amendment. He proposed to Lodhi to file a separate application to consider this aspect.
According to the media reports, 22,000 cases will be transferred to the FCC, and this very issue requires an interpretation of constitutional provisions.
The case was adjourned for an indefinite period.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025