ISLAMABAD, July 27 The Supreme Court asked the government on Monday to have the grace and consider paying pension to former chief justice Sajjad Ali Shah who had been eased out during Nawaz Sharif's second term.

A 14-judge special bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry took up a petition filed by Sajjad Ali Shah seeking pension as a former chief justice.

Other members of the bench are Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sardar Mohammad Raza Khan, Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassaduq Husain Jillani, Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk, Justice Raza Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Ghulam Rabbani, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmani, Justice Mohammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja.

The court decided to continue the hearing on the merit from Thursday.

The court asked Deputy Attorney General Agha Tariq Mehmood to seek instructions from the government by informing it about the precedence of late Justice Saad Saood Jan who was allowed pension as chief justice although he had served as acting chief justice for only 54 days and later retired as a senior judge of the apex court.

The court made it clear that pendency of the instant matter should not be considered an impediment for the government in reaching a decision.

In what could be called a tumultuous tenure, Justice Sajjad Ali had to leave the apex court in 1997 after a 10-member bench headed by former chief justice Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui ordered cancellation of his notification as chief justice and nominated Justice Ajmal Mian as the chief justice.

Justice Sajjad Ali was on the bench when supporters of then prime minister Nawaz Sharif stormed the Supreme Court in November 1997, disrupting contempt of court proceedings against Mr Sharif.

This was the same period when the Supreme Court split into two and separate cause lists were issued, one by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and the other by Justice Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui.

The portrait of Justice Sajjad Ali is still hanging in the courtroom No 1 indicating that he was the chief justice.

Justice Sajjad Ali, represented by senior counsel Mohammad Akram Sheikh, contended that he had discharged his functions as chief justice for three and a half years as a matter of right and his appointment was without any flaw.

Besides, no consultation was required for appointments when Justice Sajjad Ali was elevated as chief justice, although after the 1996 Al-Jihad Trust case, commonly known as judges case, meaningful consultation between the chief justice and the president was held to be binding for the appointment of other judges.

“By doing so, the intention of the constitution makers was to keep it open to the president to appoint any judge even any person directly from the bar as the chief justice,” the petitioner said

Referring to the 10-member bench which had delivered the Malik Asad Ali judgment in 1998 by declaring his appointment as unconstitutional, Sajjad Ali contended that eight of the 10 judges had been appointed on his recommendation and administered oath of office by him.