'No concept of judges' permanent transfer'

The Karachi Bar Association and PTI leader Shoaib Shaheen Advocate have challenged the Supreme Court's order in a case related to transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and a subsequent change in the IHC judges' seniority list.

The petitioners have contended that the June 20 verdict of a constitutional bench of the SC has misinterpreted the Constitution and wrongly inferred the concept of a permanent transfer from the Article 200 of the Constitution.

Article 200 of the Constitution deals with the transfer of high court judges. It outlines the process for transferring a judge from one high court to another.

According to the article, the president can transfer a judge, but only with their consent and after consultation with the chief justice of Pakistan and the chief justices of both high courts involved.

The petitioners have contended there is no provision of a permanent transfer of a superior court judge in the Constitution and only the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) is entitled to fill vacant positions in high courts and the apex court.

The petitions also argue that the president also does not have the authority to determine seniority of judges and urged the SC to revisit its order and declare it null and void.

In a majority verdict, an SC constitutional bench on June 20 upheld the transfer of three provincial high court judges to the IHC, noting that these transfers could not be declared new appointments.

However, the majority judges partially remanded the matter to the President of Pakistan to determine the seniority of the transferred judges after examining and vetting their service record "as soon as possible, including the question of whether the transfer is on a permanent or temporary basis".

Later on June 29, President Asif Ali Zardari named Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar as the senior-most judge of the IHC, following a determination of judicial seniority.