ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has declined to immediately suspend the duties of judges transferred to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) amid an ongoing seniority dispute. However, the court has issued notices to all concerned parties in response to a petition filed by five IHC judges challenging the seniority status of the transferred judges.
A five-member constitutional bench heard the case, which revolves around whether judges transferred to the IHC retain their previous seniority or begin anew. The petitioners had requested a stay order ahead of a Judicial Commission meeting scheduled for April 18, expressing concerns that proceedings might affect their case. The court denied the stay but set April 17 as the date for the next hearing.
Notices were issued to Acting IHC Chief Justice Sardar Sarfraz Dogar, Justice Khadim Hussain, and Justice Muhammad Asif. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar noted that while there are five separate petitions, they share similar legal questions—primarily whether civil service seniority rules apply to the judiciary, which, he clarified, they do not.
Representing the petitioners, senior lawyer Munir A. Malik challenged both the transfers and the adjustments in seniority. He argued that under Article 200 of the Constitution, judicial transfers must be temporary and require the judge’s consent. However, Justice Mazhar responded that the Constitution allows for transfers with consent but makes no distinction between temporary and permanent transfers. He emphasized that a judge’s seniority should be preserved from their original oath-taking date, even if re-administered after a transfer.
The bench also rejected a request to summon additional transfer records, stating that the official notification was already part of the case file. Justice Mazhar questioned the need for further documentation and asked whether the petitioners would withdraw their case if the transfer process was found to be procedurally sound.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan raised further questions about the legal framework for transferring judges under the Islamabad High Court establishment law and why new appointments from relevant provinces were not considered instead. Malik responded that the IHC law only allows for new appointments, not transfers.
Justice Afghan also queried whether the oath of office specifies the jurisdiction of the high court. Malik confirmed that it does, citing the inclusion of “Islamabad Capital Territory” in the IHC oath.
The court additionally issued notices to the Judicial Commission of Pakistan, the provincial Advocate Generals, and the Advocate General for Islamabad. The hearing was adjourned until April 17.
