| Case ID |
03ed03e5-d0a9-4f66-adaf-bd911ee9825a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Writ Petitions Nos. 1092, 1130, 1194, 1235, 1255 a |
| Decision Date |
Sep 17, 2019 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court addressed the maintainability of the writ petitions challenging the appointment process of judges in the High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. It concluded that while the wisdom of constitutional consultation regarding the appointment of judges could not be challenged, procedural defects in the consultation process were open to scrutiny. The court emphasized that effective, meaningful, and purposive consultation is essential, and the President's actions must align with constitutional provisions. The decision held that the appointment of judges was valid as the consultation process, though flawed, had met the necessary requirements of law. The court also underlined the significance of consensus among judicial consultees, although it recognized that complete agreement was not mandatory for the process to be deemed valid. |
| Summary |
The case revolves around the constitutional validity of the appointment process for judges in the High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir as mandated by the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act of 1974. Multiple petitioners, comprising advocates and members of legal associations, challenged the process, claiming it lacked proper consultation with key judicial figures. The court's ruling clarified that while the President must consult both the Chief Justice of AJ&K and the Chief Justice of the High Court, the consultation does not necessitate a consensus. The judgment highlights the importance of adherence to constitutional norms to uphold the judiciary's independence and integrity. The ruling serves as a significant precedent for future judicial appointments and reinforces the legal framework governing such appointments in AJ&K. |
| Court |
High Court (AJ&K)
|
| Entities Involved |
AJ&K Council,
Government of the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir
|
| Judges |
AZHAR SALEEM BABAR, A.C.J.,
MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, J
|
| Lawyers |
Barrister Adnan Nawaz Khan, Barrister Humayun Nawaz Khan, Syed Shahid Bahar, Sardar Shamshad Hussain and Fayyaz Ahmed Janjua, Advocates, for the Petitioners.,
Abdul Rasheed Abbasi, Advocate, for Respondents Nos.1 to 6, 8 and 9.,
Raja Muhammad Hanif Khan, Advocate, for the Private Respondents.,
Bashir Ahmed Mughal, Advocate, for AJ&K Council.,
Sardar Tahir Anwar Khan and Raja Ibrar Hussain, Advocates, for Respondent No.7 (President of AJ&K)
|
| Petitioners |
Barrister Adnan Nawaz Khan, Advocate, Supreme Court of AJ&K and others,
Aamir Ali Awan, Advocate Supreme Court of AJ&K, Muzaffargarh,
Ch. Muhammad Riaz Alam, Advocate Supreme Court of Mirpur AJ&K and 7 others,
Fayyaz Ahmed Janjua, Advocate Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Member Central Bar Association,
Sardar Saif Ullah Hajazi, Advocate High Court District Bar Association, Rawalakot and 15 others,
Shahid Ajmal, Advocate Supreme Court Member Sehensa Bar
|
| Respondents |
Government of the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Secretary and others,
Azad Government of the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Secretary and 13 others,
Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Secretary and 13 others,
Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Secretary and 16 others
|
| Citations |
2020 SLD 1307,
2020 PLD 9
|
| Other Citations |
Gupta's case AIR 1982 SC 149,
Muhammad Younas Tahir's case PLD 2012 SC (AJ&K) 42,
Al-Jehad Trust v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1996 SC 324,
2013 MLD 520,
PLD 2009 SC 879
|
| Laws Involved |
Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974),
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
43(2-A),
44,
O. I, R. 10(2)
|