ISLAMABAD: A recent Supreme Court judgement has prompted 45 individuals, formerly senior officials at the Islamabad High Court (IHC), to seek reinstatement after they were sacked for being appointed ‘illegally’ because they were not hired through a competitive process.

Earlier this week, a five-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed announced a federal order on identical petitions filed by sacked IHC employees seeking a review of a judgement passed by retired Justice Amir Hani Muslim.

The court ruled that the powers of the IHC chief justice could not be questioned and the chief justice’s administrative order could not be challenged due to a constitutional bar.

The SC subsequently overruled the judgement passed on a petition by Chaudhry Mohammad Akram.

A SC bench headed by Mr Muslim on Sept 26, 2016, ordered the de-notification of all recruitments made in the IHC between 2011 and 2012.

SC bench has overruled 2016 judgement de-notifying all recruitments made in IHC in 2011-12

“The IHC chief justice and/or the administration committee of the high court have made appointments... in complete disregard of the mandate given by the rules framed under Article 208 of the Constitution,” the judgement stated.

The court had declared scores of appointments, including that of the brother of then IHC chief justice Mohammad Anwar Khan Kasi, illegal.

On directions from the SC, the IHC chief justice had constituted a committee of three judges to examine all the appointments made in the court from 2011 onwards, which examined the appointments at the high court as well as transfers and postings during this period.

However, following the most recent judgement, former deputy registrar Idrees Khan Kasi – the former IHC chief justice’s brother – and other officials gathered at the IHC and demanded they be reinstated.

The pressured the administration to issue their joining reports immediately and asked for their respective offices to be handed over, a senior high court official told Dawn.

The officials then went to the office of the registrar, Sajid Baloch, and submitted their applications seeking to rejoin their former posts.

The registrar assured them prompt action would be taken on their applications.

In the initial case, the petitioner had challenged the appointments of the brother and the children of close friends of the then IHC chief justice, as well as the relatives of other judges at the high court and the SC.

In the September 2016 judgement, Mr Muslim wrote: “If the competent authority itself starts cherry-picking by deliberately ignoring and overlooking meritorious candidates [for] appointment... then the image of the institution will be tainted beyond repair.”

The court also held that the IHC chief justice had lost sight of the scheme of the rules by ignoring the mandatory competitive test for the appointment of employees to the high court.

The judgement held that all appointments made on deputation or initial appointment or absorption against a permanent vacancy or against a promotion post should also be de-notified, but clarified that these directives will not apply to lower scale employees, appointed in grade one to seven, provided they were otherwise eligible.

The verdict also ordered the repatriation of officers to their parent departments, including the private sector, within 15 days from the date of their de-notification.

On repatriation, these officers would be allowed to rejoin their parent departments and the question of termination of their service would not be a hurdle to this.

They would also be entitled to their seniority with their batch mates in their parent departments.

Published in Dawn, November 1st, 2020