Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: A petition had been moved in Islamabad High Court (IHC) challenging the absorption of 12 judges of lower courts of federal capital.

A division bench comprising Justice Aamir Farooq and Justice Gul Hassan Aurangzeb had served notices to the respondents in a plea filed by a Civil Judge of District Courts, Muhammad Shabbir.

The petitioner had cited 15 respondents in his petition consisting the absorbed judges including District and Sessions Judge Syed Kausar Abbas Zaidi, Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Bashir, Additional Registrar (IHC) Wajid Ali, Additional Registrar Special Court for Trial of High Treason Case Azam Khan, AD&SJ (East) Shahrukh Arjumand, Civil Judge 1st Class (East) Qudratullah, Civil Judge (West) Muhammad Abbas, Civil Judge Ihtesham Alam Khan, Civil Judge Muhammad Inamullah, Civil Judge Humayun Dilawar, Civil Judge Imran Khan Sikandari and AD&SJ Kamran Basharat Mufti.

The petitioner contended in his petition that before promulgation of Islamabad Judicial Service Rules, 2011, some judicial officers of different ranks were working on deputation in Islamabad.

By operation of Section 6 sub section 3 of IHC Act, 2010 they were to be sent back to their respective High Courts after establishment of the district judiciary.

He said except AD&SJ Syed Muzafar Ali and SJ Atiq ur Rehman all other judicial officers were sent back to Lahore High Court in February, 2012.

The two judges including Syed Muzaffar Ali Shah and Kamran Basharat Mufti were absorbed one step above, which was a clear violation of IHC Act, 2010. Later acknowledging this fact, the IHC repatriated Syed Muzaffar Ali Shah to LHC but no action was taken against Kamran Basharat Mufti who was also observed under the same notification.

The petitioner further stated that after repatriation of the judicial officers to LHC, the above mentioned 12 judges were posted on deputation under Rule 9 of IJS Rules, 2011 in February, 2016 for a period of three years and only after a time of 42 days of their posting, they were absorbed, which was illegal and void ab-initio.

The petitioner gave an application on November 7, 2016 to the respondent for deletion of Rule 8 of IJS Rules, 2011 but nothing to avail. He said that Rule 8 was inserted in IJS, 2011 with malafide intentions just to procure the appointment of judicial officers of their choice without undergoing the selection procedure. The inserted rule was also conflicting with IHC Act.

He said the above move had opened the way of direct absorption of judicial officers on promotion posts due to which the right to seniority and promotion of the petitioner in service had been affected. Civil Judge Muhammad Shabbir prayed the court to declare the absorption notification of above 12 judges as null and void and they may be sent back to their parent departments.

He also requested the court to order for deletion of Rule 8 from IJS, 2011 and issue a corrigendum in this regard.