Appointments of IHC judges: IHC grants federation more time to submit reply
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) granted the federal government more time to submit its response in a petition challenging the appointments of IHC judges Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz.
A single bench of Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro on Wednesday heard the petition filed by Advocate Dr. G.M. Chaudhry. During the hearing, the federal government sought more time to file its written reply, which the court allowed.
The court also issued a notice to the Attorney General for Pakistan under Section 27-A, seeking assistance on the legal questions raised in the case.
Justice Soomro directed the Assistant Attorney General to submit a written response before the next hearing and remarked that the matter would be fixed as the first case on June 30 for detailed arguments. He also questioned the delay in filing the government’s response, observing that the issue involved a straightforward legal question.
During the proceedings, the petitioner argued that the Islamabad High Court is not a federal high court but a court established for the Islamabad Capital Territory. He contended that since the two judges were not members of the Islamabad High Court Bar, their appointments required judicial scrutiny.
The court observed that a key question requiring determination was whether the two judges were legally eligible for appointment to the Islamabad High Court.
Justice Soomro also noted that the case of judges transferred to Islamabad from other jurisdictions stood on a different legal footing.
Upon the petitioner’s request, the court formally sought the Attorney General’s assistance and adjourned the matter until June 30 for further proceedings.
Meanwhile, the same bench also suspended a property tax bill issued by the Metropolitan Corporation of Islamabad (MCI) and sought responses from the federal government and other relevant authorities. Justice Soomro issued the order while hearing a petition filed by Ahmad Hassan Rana, who challenged both the March 2024 gazette notification and the property tax bill issued in April 2026. He argued that the imposition of the property tax violates rules framed under the laws of 1958 and 2015.
According to the court order, notices have been issued to the Federation through the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Cabinet Division. The court has also sought replies from the Metropolitan Corporation of Islamabad (MCI) and the Capital Development Authority (CDA).
The petitioner further contended that MCI lacks the legal authority to levy property tax on the basis of the annual value of buildings and land.
The petition maintained that the impugned gazette notification should be declared void and of no legal effect, arguing that it was issued without lawful authority.
After suspending the property tax bill, the court deferred the hearing for four weeks and directed the respondents to submit their replies.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026