Islamabad:
A constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court withdrew the ordinances of January 13 and 16 adopted by a regular bench with regard to clarification on the jurisdiction of the regular and constitutional benches of the SC during the hearing of a a lot of cases contesting the ledges of the Act on the custom of SC, 1969.
On Tuesday, a CB of seven members led by Judge Aminuddin Khan resumed the affairs which were previously placed before a regular bench of three members led by judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.
However, on January 17, the Committee of the Supreme Court which listed business before the benches did not withdraw the affairs of the regular bench and referred them to the CB committee for re -election.
This thwarted the regular bench which initiated an outrage procedure against an additional registrar, Nazar Abbas, for having raped its order. Later, on January 27, the bench exempted the official from the accusations of outrage but noted that the SC committees had committed an outrage in the court.
He also ordered to place the cases again in front of the original bench.
However, the CB of seven members to which the case was subsequently registered for withdrawing the ordinances of the regular bench dated January 13 and January 16 Tuesday.
During the hearing, the Pakistan Attorney General (AGP) Mansoor Awan said the government had decided to challenge the court to court by judge Shah Bench.
“An appeal will be filed against the court decision to the court issued the day before, and it was decided to challenge the orders of justice of January 13 and 16,” he said.
During the hearing, judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar pointed out that judge Mansoor Ali Shah had ordered that customs affairs were placed before his bench. He wondered if the CB procedure could continue in the presence of this order.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail questioned the legitimacy of the regular bench order in the outrageous case.
“It is also a court. Life is unpredictable, but the Supreme Court and other courts will remain. We must take care of our institution. No one should worry; nothing will happen to this institution” , he added.
Judge Mazhar expressed his surprise, claiming that the order of January 16 said that the case should be “considered to be heard”. He questioned the origin of the term, noting that a case is heard or this is not the case. “Where does the expression” considered “?” Comes from? ” He asked.
AGP Awan said he had two orders from January 13. “One specified the next hearing date as January 27, while the other indicated on January 16. The hearing date had been modified in the order,” he said.
Judge Mazhar also declared that it was not clear how, without serving the AGP an opinion under rule 27-A, it was indicated that the case should be considered to be understood.
Subsequently, the CB issued an order to fix the file of the Outline file at the Nazar Abbas with the cases of customs duties and postponed the hearing indefinitely.
A member of the bench, judge Ayesha Malik, challenged the case. In a note published after the hearing, she said that she would not like to hear these cases in order to “protect and preserve the sacred nature of the initial procedure and the judicial order of January 16”.
