Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJ) Yahya Afridi may have agreed with four of his brordes on the issue of seniority in Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges after transferring three new judges to the court from high courts in Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan earlier this month.

However, the lawyer of Pakistan (AGP), Mansoor Awan, does not agree with those who reported previously. He supports the seniority list issued by IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq, after which Justice Sarfaraz Dogar, transferred from Lahore High Court (LHC), is now the senior Puisne judge.

Sources revealed that in his written position, AGP presented the Legal Commission in Pakistan (JCP) has declared that he does not agree with the concerns that Justice Yahya Afridi Rejser.

However, AGP Awan clarified that he differs with CJ.

He said that the transfer of a Supreme Court judge is not temporary; Rather, it is performed in the public interest after consultations with the president and the respective head of the high courts. He said that Justice Dogar was asked to express his consent to the public interest, and he did not accept the transfer for personal reasons, but given the greater good.

He said that Justice Dogar’s seniority cannot be placed at the lowest level, nor a judge is considered an official. The rules of the seniority of the officials do not apply to judges to the overall court, as Pakistan’s constitution has established separate terms and conditions for their service.

AGP claimed that the question of a judge’s seniority cannot be raised before JCP. Instead, it can only be decided on the legal side through a petition submitted in accordance with Article 184 (2). 3.

The determination of the High Court Judge’s seniority falls under the authority of their respective chief contemporary, and JCP cannot question it. Any objections regarding this case can only be raised before the Supreme Court in accordance with Article 184 (2). 3, as referred to in the Justice Farukh Irfan Khan case.

He noted that when a judge is transferred from one Supreme Court to another, there is no requirement for them to make a new oath as the Constitution does not require it. There is a clear distinction between a new appointment and a transfer, and in accordance with Article 202, a judge does not need to take a fresh oath at the transfer.

AGP declared that seniority is determined by the respective Supreme Court’s respective Supreme Court. Since the IHC High Court Farooq has completed Justice Dogar’s seniority, it is now crucial.

He noted that the five IHC judges who have challenged this case were dismissed by Justice Farooq in accordance with Article 184 (2). 3.