Islamabad:
The judges of the High Court of Islamabad (IHC) intensified with judge Babar Sattar declaring that a division bench – directed by the acting chief of the IHC, Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, does not have the power to suspend the procedure pending before a single bench and to “frustrated” procedures.
A bench with a single member including judge Sattar heard a case linked to the Ministry of Immigration and Passport. He had adjourned it until April 28 after his last hearing on March 26.
However, the petition was not registered to hear on April 28 in the list of regular causes. Judge Sattar, April 25, published an investigation in the assistant registrar of the (judicial) IHC on the administrative side that the case must be registered on April 28 under the ordinance dated March 26.
The judge also ordered that an additional list of cause be issued to register the case in hearing in accordance with the order dated March 26 “which had not been challenged before a competent court and remained on the ground”.
The assistant registrar, however, informed the bench by a note that a request for objection had been filed before the division bench – I contesting the bench order to a single member dated March 26.
He noted that the division bench on March 26 had admitted the call for the regular hearing. He also ordered the club registrar two other cases with the instantaneous case.
However, judge Sattar led the hearing of the case on Monday and then made an 8 -page order, declaring that his ordinances dated March 26 and March 12 were of an interlocutory nature and a final decision of the subject which remains unanswered.
He noted that the judges including the division-1 bench were not assisted properly and with jurisdiction when they were seized by ICA n ° 98 of 2025 which led to the order dated March 26.
“If their attention had been drawn to the established legal proposals mentioned above, it is unthinkable that they would have summoned the file of this court or otherwise issued in any direction which would thwart or frustrate the procedure in instance in its court in its constitutional jurisdiction.
“It was clarified by the Supreme Court in a certain number of recent cases that there is also no administrative authority at the office of the chief judge to interfere with a case in progress before a duly constituted bench which is seized of this case and hearing it.”
The order indicated by not being listed by the petition to hear on April 28, the Deputy Deputy Registrar (judicial) Prima Facie acted in violation of the order of March 26, which has never been disputed and remains on the ground.
Meanwhile, the association of the bar of the high court of Lahore submitted a replica in the seniority case of the judges of the IHC.
A constitutional bench of five members of the Supreme Court will take over a hearing of the case today.
