SJC reviewing complaint against an LHC judge

The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) – the forum that can hold superior court judges accountable – has initiated the process for scrutinizing a complaint filed against a serving judge of the Lahore High Court (LHC) who is accused of hiring officials to the LHC administration in violation of law.

According to sources, a former civil judge Mian Masood Ahmad has filed the complaint.

The complaint said 150 assistants, 75 assistant registrars and 25 deputy registrars were illegally and unlawfully appointed or promoted in total disregard of high court rules and orders appointments and conditions of Service Rules 1964 /1979, Rules 7,8,9 amended through notification dated May 27, 1979.

It said under the said laws and rules, there is no provision/vacancy meant for the post of additional registrars in the LHC. It also alleged that in a meeting of the rule committee on May 14, 2013, insertion of Rule 6 was recommended for the post of additional registrar in the LHC.

However, he said, the approval of the draft by the committee does not confer any sort of authorization to appoint any additional registrar. It claimed that recommendations of the committee had to undergo the process of approval by the law department/finance division and the office of the Punjab governor.

“[This process] has not been adopted as yet [and] therefore the appointments are nullity under the law,” it claimed. The complaint said the incumbent registrar is a judicial officer – a district and sessions judge. However under the rule, there is no provision to appoint a judicial officer as a registrar.

He said the apex court has already taken action against “similar kind of illegal acts committed” by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) through its judgment reported as PLD 2016 SC 961. The complaint requested the SJC to admit his complaint and address his grievances.

According to the sources, Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, who is also the SJC chairman, has referred the matter to a senior puisne judge – Justice Mushir Alam – in terms of clause 7 (1) (a) of the SJC Procedure Enquiry 2005.

Clause 7 (1) (a) says once any information in respect of inquiry into the conduct of a judge is received by any member or the council, it shall be presented to the SJC chairman who shall refer the same to any member of the council to look into the said information and to express his opinion.

“If the council is satisfied that the information prima facie discloses sufficient material for an enquiry, it shall proceed to consider the same,” it adds.

In view of the above provisions, the complainant – Mian Maqood Ahmad – has been asked to appear before Justice Mushir Alam in his chamber on November 21 (Saturday).

Senior lawyers believe that there is no allegation of favoritism and nepotism against the judge in the complaint. A five-judge larger bench of the apex court had recently overturned its earlier judgment on illegal appointments in the IHC.

The SJC is a forum constituted under Article 209 for initiating proceedings of misconduct against superior courts judges on the violation of their code of conduct.