SC issues notices in G-B CM's plea

Notice sent to AGP; hearing adjourned till March 1


Hasnaat Malik February 21, 2023
Police officers walk past the Supreme Court of Pakistan building, in Islamabad, Pakistan April 6, 2022. REUTERS/Akhtar Soomro

ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notices to the respondents over the constitutional petition of the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Minister Khalid Khurshid Khan, challenging the appointment of a judge as well as the extension given to three judges of the region’s chief court by the government.

A three-member bench of the apex court led by Justice Ijazul Ahsan and comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi heard the matter. Makhdoom Ali Khan appeared on behalf of the G-B chief executive.

A notice was also sent to the Attorney General of Pakistan Shehzad Ata Elahi, who was a respondent in the plea.

The bench allowed the petitioner to amend the petition challenging the appointment of Chief Judge Supreme Appellate Court (SAC) G-B Sardar Shamim Khan.

Read G-B CM again moves SC against PM’s orders

The hearing of the case was adjourned until March 1.

After a passage of five months, the Supreme Court heard the constitutional petition.

In September last year, the chief minister filed a petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution through senior lawyer Makhdoom Ali Khan and made the federal government, G-B governor, and newly-appointed Judge Chief Court Javed Ahmed respondents.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif had given an extension to three judges of the G-B Chief Court on September 16, following a summary moved by G-B Governor Syed Mahdi Shah. However, the summary was initiated without consulting the chief minister.

Later, the Registrar’s Office returned the petition by raising seven objections. In the meanwhile, the G-B CM challenged the objections by filing an appeal in the chamber, which was heard by Justice Munib Akhtar.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ