| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 1853 2023 PLD 32 2023 SLD 1853 |
Constitution Petitions Nos. 13, 14 of 2018 and Civil Review Petition No. 421 of 2018 in Constitution Petition No. 55 of 2017, decided on 17th August, 2021. Constitution Petitions Nos. 13 and 14 of 2018. (Petitions under Article 184(3) of the Constitutio
Present: Mushir Alam, Umar Ata Bandial and Maqbool Baqar, JJ
Hamid Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ahmed Nawaz Chaudhary, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in Constitution Petitions Nos. 13 and 14 of 2018). Shah Khawar, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood A. Sheikh, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in
ABDUL SATTAR and 2 others---Petitioners
VERSUS
The JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN and others---Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 184(3),197
(a) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 184(3)---Invoking original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Art. 184(3) of the Constitution---Pre-requisites---To invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, a petitioner must establish the violation of his Fundamental Right(s), the enforcement of which is a matter of importance to the public at large---In the absence of either element, the Constitutional petition cannot be entertained. Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2013 SC 413 and Al-Jehad Trust and another v. Lahore High Court 2011 SCMR 1688 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 197 184(3)---Additional Judges of the High Court not confirmed as Permanent Judges (petitioners)---Constitutional petition filed by the petitioners against their non-confirmation---Maintainability---Petitioners failed to establish the primary condition for the maintainability of their petition, namely, that any Fundamental Right of theirs had been infringed---Additional Judges are only appointed for such duration as the President determines subject to any period prescribed by law---Currently no such law exists therefore it is the President who decides the period for which a person performs the functions of an Additional Judge---As a matter of convention such period is one year, at the end of which the (Judicial) Commission may either confirm an Additional Judge or grant him/her an extension or allow his/her term of appointment to expire---Since the confirmation of Additional Judges is contingent upon the approval of the Commission, it cannot be said that Additional Judges possess a constitutional tenure---Petitioners being Additional Judges cannot on the strength of the doctrine of independence of judiciary and/or access to justice claim a right to be confirmed as Permanent Judges of the High Court---Any decision to the contrary will render Article 197 of the Constitution redundant---Similarly, Additional Judges cannot also claim an extension of their term because no Fundamental Right under the Constitution confers such entitlement upon them---When the (Judicial) Commission as a whole was not in favour of recommending the petitioners for an…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492