The Supreme Court Registrar has returned petitions filed by five Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges, citing objections to their admissibility. The Registrar’s Office rejected the applications because the judges failed to identify a question of public importance or demonstrate a violation of fundamental rights required to invoke the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.
The objections stated that the applications seemed to stem from ‘personal grievances,’ which are inadmissible under Article 184(3), citing the Zulfiqar Mehdi vs. PIA case precedent. Further, the judges did not provide sufficient justification for their filings nor identify respondents for notice issuance, failing to meet the essential requirements of Article 184(3).
Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Babar Sattar, Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri, Saman Rafat Imtiaz, and Ejaz Ishaq Khan of the IHC had filed separate petitions against their chief justice. The judges asserted that administrative actions should not diminish the judicial authority of high court judges. They argued that once a case is assigned, the chief justice lacks the power to reconstitute benches or transfer cases.
They also contended that the chief justice cannot arbitrarily exclude judges from rosters or use administrative actions to impede their judicial duties. The petitioners maintained that bench formation, case transfers, and cause lists should adhere to rules approved by all judges under Articles 202 and 192(1) of the Constitution.
Furthermore, the judges challenged the legitimacy of administrative committees formed through notifications issued on February 3 and July 15, deeming them ‘mala fide, illegal, and void.’ They sought a Supreme Court declaration invalidating both the committees and their actions.