ISLAMABAD: Nineteen Islamabad High Court (IHC) employees on Tuesday filed a review petition in the Supreme Court requesting it to review its September 26 verdict of declaring 2011 to 2012 appointments illegal. The employees, including brother of IHC Chief Justice Anwar Kasi, filed the petition under Article 188 of the constitution read with XXVI of Supreme Court Rules 1980 through their counsel Iftikhar Gilani. A landmark judgement authored by Justice Amir Hani Muslim had ordered the IHC to immediately de-notify all the appointments, deputation, absorption and reappointments and initiate procedure for fresh recruitments through National Testing Services (NTS) preferably within 45 days. The petitioners requested the court to form a full bench to examine the judgement as it has negatively impacted the functions of superior courts for the reasons that the judgement has almost re-written Clause (5) and Clause (1)(a)(i) of the Article 199, which is not permissible. “That the most grave and unintended consequence of the impugn judgment is that references are being filed and resolutions passed by the Bar Association against the sitting Judge of Supreme Court of Pakistan and the Chief Justice of IHC asking for their resignation,” the petition read. “It is indeed beyond painful that the honorable judges, who have impeccable records and exemplary conduct, are being maligned in public because of certain unwarranted observations in the impugn judgment,” it added. The petitioners said that the last time a high court was established in Subcontinent was in 1866, adding that therefore the formation of a new high court after passage of 150 years has been a difficult and a novel task. “Therefore expert and experienced staff was specially brought in for this purpose to help bridge the gap to avoid complications. This crucial aspect has been overlooked by top court,” the petition read. The petition requested that the judgement not only inadvertently caused grave prejudice by taking away their right of appeal but also laid down a precedent that will result in the breach of right of appeal. The IHC employees who were in Grade 7 have been offered protection under the judgement, but the ones in Grade 9 have been denied the same without any reason thus creating a distinction that will result in discrimination against the employees in higher grades, the petition added. As per the Supreme Court (Appointment of Officers and Servant and Terms and Condition of Services) Rules 1982; the additional registrar’s post could be filled by an officer of high court or Supreme Court by promotion serving in BPS-18 therefore the SC rules allowed two-step promotion. Moreover, the Civil Servants Act does not bar two-step promotion either. This crucial aspect has been overlooked, the petition read further. It added that the top court has also erred in holding that as per Rule 6 (i) of LHC Rules such appointment could only be made either with concurrence of the governor or in consultation with the public service commission, as such rules apply only to persons belonging to service of Pakistan were as the present petitioners come within the ambit of Rule 6 (i) (c), which states that the chief justice will have the discretion to appoint a person serving on the high court establishment.