Islamabad:
Judge Sardar Ejaz Ishaq of the High Court of Islamabad (IHC) asked for help from the Court Amici and the Advocate General (AG) in the outrage in the legal proceedings for the transfer of a case in instance before him to another bench.
The judge made a written ordinance of the hearing of the court of the court against the assistant and other registrar. The judge ordered the assistant registrar to show the next hearing the rules concerning the power to withdraw assistance from the outrage in the court without the consent of the judge concerned.
The court’s order said that the office of the Court, the office made the order of the acting judge on March 17 and the court asked the defender General to help him understand the order.
According to the first paragraph of the ordinance of the chief judge, the petitioner did not press his request for a case transfer, but from the second paragraph, it appeared that the petitions had been consolidated and that the recovery of the transfer was granted, according to the order.
It is obvious that business could not be grouped together without being transferred first, said the judge in his order. He also wrote in order that he may not read the order properly or maybe there was another way to read it. He ordered the GA to help the court at the next hearing.
The ordinance said that a CPC had been filed under article 24 and that the GA after some hesitation admitted that article 24 did not apply. Since then, the high court bench has not been a subordinate court of the acting chief judge, the registrar’s office set this request before the acting chief judge with objections.
However, the order of the acting chief judge to form a larger bench has not shown the reasons for the elimination of objections. Not to write the reasons for the elimination of the objection was against the practice and the IHC procedure, the order said.
For transparency, the reasons for the elimination of objections, in particular concerning the admissibility of the request, were written. Experienced justice officers from the Office ACT as the first filter for unacceptable requests and the judge should write the reasons for deleting objections.
According to the ordinance, no legal precedent has been presented so far to have withdrawn a pending case. He added that the Advocate General mentioned a provision of the rules of the High Court of Lahore concerning the training of benches, but that was not relevant.
The judge said that lawyers should help the court and that the public should also keep an eye on this case, adding that this case did not concern the leader of a political party or any judge, but rather the principle applied to each case, and the power to transfer the case using administrative powers.
The court declared that the AMICI court would be appointed on a later date to provide assistance. He said that he had become more important in a case of court to court because no one could be a better judge than the judge, whose order was raped. The next hearing of the case will take place on April 11.
