ISLAMABAD: Senior counsel Hamid Khan on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to adjudicate former Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui’s plea against Oct 11, 2018 notification of his removal before June next, a date when he would have retired, had he been in the office.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who was heading a five-judge Supreme Court bench, however ordered the court office to re-list the case on Jan 2021 along with other connected matters but with an observation that the case would be decided before June 2021.

The court also ordered the office to inform about the objections to senior counsel Rasheed A Razvi as well as Salahuddin Ahmed who filed separate petitions on behalf of the Karachi Bar Association and the Islamabad Bar Association about the office objections against their petitions.

Hamid Khan, who was representing the former judge reminded the bench according to its last order of Sept 24, the court had postponed further hearing for a month but took up the matter again on Wednesday after over two months.

On Nov 30 also, Justice Siddiqui had written a two-page letter to Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed seeking necessary directions for the court office for early hearing of his appeal.

Justice Bandial, however, reminded the counsel that the court could not complete its regular roster even today, when important cases like this were fixed for hearing.

The entire judicial work at the registries of Karachi and Lahore had simply been stopped since the judges holding courts in these cities had to come to the principal seat of Islamabad in view of Justice Qazi Faez Isa case, Justice Bandial observed.

But we must be happy to know that the bar associations were standing behind important cases, Justice Bandial observed while apparently referring to the filing of petitions by different bar associations in the Justice Siddiqui as well as Justice Isa cases.

Justice Bandial observed that the court wanted to deliver good law and hope that the court would also learn more with the assistance of the senior counsel to reach the right conclusion.

Rasheed A Razvi pleaded before the court that the court office had not informed him what paragraphs of his petition they thought were scandalous so that he could file an amended petition whereas Salahuddin Ahmed said that on the basis of his guess work, he already had filed the amended petition but it had not been numbered by the court office.

In his amended petition, the Islamabad Bar Association had pleaded before the court to order an independent and transparent inquiry into the allegations made by Justice Siddiqui in his speech of July 21, 2018.

While speaking at the Rawalpindi District Bar Association, the former judge had made remarks about the involvement of certain officers of the executive organ of the state specifically ISI in the affairs of the judiciary. He alleged that they manipulated the formation of the benches of the high court.

The petition alleged that even if the allegations were found to be correct by the inquiry commission, the apex court should order appropriate action against the persons concerned.

The petitioner also pleaded that the apex court should set aside the Supreme Judicial Council’s report or opinion of Oct 11, 2019 and the subsequent notification of the same date of removing him as the judge should also be declared null and void.

Published in Dawn, December 10th, 2020