Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founding chairman Imran Khan has filed a petition in Pakistan’s Supreme Court, challenging the recent transfer of judges, calling it unconstitutional and unlawful. The petition, submitted under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, argues that the transfer notification violates judicial independence. Imran has requested the court to declare the notification null and void. The federal government and the registrars of the high courts in Lahore, Sindh, Balochistan, and Islamabad have been named as respondents in the case. Imran’s plea seeks a directive from the Supreme Court to ensure compliance with legal precedents, including the landmark Al-Jehad Trust case, which set guidelines for judicial appointments and transfers. The petition emphasises that judicial transfers must adhere to constitutional principles and must not be influenced by external pressures. It also calls for a strict observance of judicial autonomy. The challenge comes amid heightened tensions between Imran’s party and the government, with the judiciary often at the centre of political controversies. Legal experts believe the case could test the Supreme Court’s stance on judicial independence. Imran’s legal team argues that the move could impact fair trials and judicial neutrality, urging the top court to intervene immediately. Last month, the judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) decided to challenge the rejection of their representation. The representation seeks the restoration of the previous seniority structure of the IHC. Additionally, the petition will request the annulment of the decision issued by IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq, who had dismissed the representation. Chief Justice Aamer Farooq had previously upheld the placement of three transferred judges to the IHC from three other high courts, affirming their rankings at the second, ninth and 12th positions in the seniority list. The new seniority list was challenged by five IHC judges. The chief justice ruled that the transferred judges did not require a fresh oath and that their seniority would be counted from the date of their first oath in the high court. Accordingly, the new seniority list of IHC judges will remain unchanged. On February 1, the judges’ strength at the IHC increased with the transfer of Justice Sarfaraz Dogar from the Lahore High Court (LHC), Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro from the Sindh High Court and Justice Muhammad Asif from the Balochistan High Court. Later, on Feb 4, a revised seniority list was issued, designating Justice Sarfaraz Dogar as the senior puisne judge, followed by Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani as the second senior-most judge and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb in the third position. Justice Tariq Jahangiri was in the fourth place, Justice Babar Sattar fifth, Justice Sardar Ishaq Khan sixth, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir seventh, Justice Suman Riffat Imtiaz eighth, Justice Soomro ninth, Justice Azam Khan 10th, Justice Muhammad Asif 11th and Justice Inam Amin Minhas 12th. Following the new seniority list, Justice Kayani, Justice Jahangiri, Justice Sattar, Justice Khan and Justice Imtiaz submitted a representation to the chief justice, saying that Justice Dogar could not be considered an IHC judge until he took oath as required under Article 194 of the Constitution. The five judges said Justice Dogar had only been sworn in as a LHC judge. However, the IHC’s seniority list already listed him as an IHC judge, placing him directly below the chief justice. They urged the chief justice to resolve the matter before the JCP meeting. Sources said the IHC chief justice rejected the representation and instructed the IHC registrar’s office to inform all those five judges about his decision on the representation. Accordingly, Justice Dogar, who took oath as a high court judge in 2015, would be the senior puisne judge of the IHC.