Eighteen judges have challenged departmental examination test. PHOTO: IHC WEBSITE
Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi had issued a stay order on the petition of 18 judges, of the Islamabad Bar Association (IBA), who have been working on probation for over two years, and were directed to appear in the test scheduled to be held on December 14, 2015.
With the stay, the examination was postponed for an indefinite period in December 2015.
Earlier, as per the departmental examination schedule, the petitioners were scheduled to take exams from December 14 to 19 and subsequently in March and July, 2016.
However, the judges challenged mandatory examination for their confirmation.
The bar association decided to become a party in the case in March.
The IBA envisages that the civil judges who do not qualify departmental examination be removed and the vacant positions filled on merit.
Strike At District Courts: Reader assaults advocate in F-8
In the petition, the judges said that they were never offered to undergo the departmental training in terms of rule 20(3) of the Islamabad Judicial Service Rules, 2011.
They said, “suddenly [all of a sudden]” they had been asked to appear in the departmental examination for their confirmation in Islamabad through a letter issued on June 23, 2015.
The judges through their counsel maintained that out of the 252 applicants who were called for viva voce conducted by the two judges of the IHC, only 20 candidates, including the petitioners, from all the provinces, were selected.
The counsel informed the court that the IHC chief justice adopted the rules regarding departmental examination of civil judges and judicial magistrates of the Lahore High Court.
As per Rule 4, the chief justice had to constitute a three-member committee but only a two-judge committee was constituted, he said.
He further argued that the schedule given for the examination was in violation of the Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1991, as four examinations have been scheduled within a period of 10 months and not in two years as specified in the rules.
The departmental examination had to be conducted immediately after judge’s appointment. The counsel further said that the judges were recruited in September 2012 whereas the rules were adopted in May 2015.
“Rules have no retrospective effect,” they said.
After the lapse of two years’ of probation, the judges are considered to be confirmed judicial officers and the rules are not applicable to the petitioner, he added.
During the pendency of petition, the counsel had prayed before the court to restrain the respondents from conducting departmental examination of the petitioner “in the interest of justice.”
In addition, the counsel prayed before the court to declare examination at a belated stage and the two-member committee as unlawful.
The court had issued stay in the case in December last year and it has not yet been vacated.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 1st, 2016.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ