Islamabad:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside an Islamabad High Court (IHC) temporary order that had withheld Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri from performing court work.
Tuesday a constitutional bench (CB) by SC – led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and consists of Justice Minister Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan – resumed to hear Justice Jahangiri’s petition.
An IHC division bench led by Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar on September 16, Justice Jahangiri prevented his duties as it began the procedure of a quo -warranto -arriving that accused him of having a questionable LLB degree.
On September 19, five IHC judges, including Justice Jahangiri, went to the Supreme Court personally to submit separate constitutional petitions, making eleven different prayers, including one seeking the cancellation of the IHC order that prevents Jahangiri from court work.
On September 25, however, the University of Karachi canceled the judge’s LLB degree in the light of a previous decision made by its syndicate, which further complicated the situation.
During the procedure on Tuesday, the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan Awan appeared to the bench and claimed that a judge cannot be abolished from judicial work through a preliminary order.
Justice Aminuddin Khan asked the petitioner, Mian Dawood Advocate, about his vision. Dawood agreed with AGP and said that, in his opinion, a judge cannot be detained from performing legal tasks using a temporary order.
Munir A Malik, Justice Jahangiri’s lawyer, while arguing arguments, referred to a former CB order, and noted that it had only stated that the written petition was maintenance. He argued that in his opinion, only the Supreme Court Council (SJC) was authorized to continue against a judge.
He added that the Malik Asad Ali case did not claim that such writings were maintenance in High Court, and care must be taken not to give the impression that SC had approved the maintenance of writings in this context.
Justice Aminuddin Khan noted that the order of the SC only rendered the language of the Malik Asad Ali case. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail noted that the court had previously stated that only SJC could remove a judge.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said the court did not affect the maintenance of a writing of Quo -Warranto in this case. “We haven’t said anywhere that Scripture can be maintained for High Court. It is for IHC to decide whether the petition has been filed that is maintainable or not.”
He further noted that the registrar office’s objections to Quo -Warranto -arranged against justice Jahangiri are still pending, and the only question before SC was whether a judge could be stopped from working through a temporary order.
Justice Mandokhail noted that arguments in the IHC written petition claimed that SC and the Supreme Court’s judges come under Pakistan’s service and are not public office holders – points that can be discussed when IHC hears the case of profit.
“In the present case, we deliberately do not want to go into the benefits,” he added.
