Judges’ appointment: Plea by 43 civil judges dismissed
Advocate Khurram Chughtai argued on behalf of the judges
PHOTO: LHC.GOV.PK
LAHORE:
Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday dismissed a petition filed by 43 civil judges challenging a restriction on their candidacy to take exams for the posts of additional district and sessions judge (AD&SJ).
Advocate Khurram Chughtai argued on behalf of the judges. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah observed that the court could not pass an order against it. He urged the lawyer to withdraw the petition.
Chughtai said the court should hear the petition and decide the matter on merit. He said the provincial government and not the high court had been party in the case. The judge then dismissed the petition for being not maintainable.
The civil judges had taken the plea that their judicial service should be considered equivalent of the legal practice of lawyers. They said their selection as judges was treated as disqualification when it came to direct appointment of AD&SJs.
“We are neither promoted after 10 years of service nor are we given permission to take the examination for AD&SJ offices.” They said the posts should not be filled by lawyers only. They questioned the logic of appointing AD&SJs from among bar members only calling this discrimination.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 16th, 2015.
Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday dismissed a petition filed by 43 civil judges challenging a restriction on their candidacy to take exams for the posts of additional district and sessions judge (AD&SJ).
Advocate Khurram Chughtai argued on behalf of the judges. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah observed that the court could not pass an order against it. He urged the lawyer to withdraw the petition.
Chughtai said the court should hear the petition and decide the matter on merit. He said the provincial government and not the high court had been party in the case. The judge then dismissed the petition for being not maintainable.
The civil judges had taken the plea that their judicial service should be considered equivalent of the legal practice of lawyers. They said their selection as judges was treated as disqualification when it came to direct appointment of AD&SJs.
“We are neither promoted after 10 years of service nor are we given permission to take the examination for AD&SJ offices.” They said the posts should not be filled by lawyers only. They questioned the logic of appointing AD&SJs from among bar members only calling this discrimination.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 16th, 2015.