IHC reshuffle sidelines judges who opposed Justice Dogar’s appointment

ISLAMABAD: In a major administrative shake-up, five senior judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), who had previously contested the appointment of Chief Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar, have been excluded from key committees following amendments to the High Court Rules.

The IHC has now formed a new four-member administrative committee, significantly altering the court’s internal power dynamics. According to a notification issued by the registrar’s office, the committee will be headed by Chief Justice Dogar, with Justice Arbab Mohammad Tahir, Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro, and Justice Azam Khan as members.

The reshuffle has notably diminished the authority of Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, previously regarded as one of the most influential judges in the IHC. He has been removed from the administrative committee and the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), and has also lost his position as inspection judge.

Sources reveal that the new DPC will consist of Justice Soomro and Justice Azam Khan.

The restructuring follows amendments to Rule 237 and Rule 239 of the High Court Rules, which now grant the chief justice discretionary powers to appoint administrative committee members and define their duties.

Reports suggest that Justice Babar Sattar, along with four other judges, raised serious concerns over these amendments, arguing that they undermine judicial seniority and due process.

The five judges had earlier challenged Justice Dogar’s transfer from the Lahore High Court (LHC) and his subsequent elevation in the IHC seniority list. After their plea was dismissed by then-Chief Justice Aamer Farooq, they approached the Supreme Court, which also declined to intervene.

Powder-laced letters sent to high court judges traced back to Islamabad

The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) later approved Justice Dogar’s appointment as IHC chief justice.

The dissenting judges have now filed an intra-court appeal against the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Justice Dogar’s seniority. They argue that Justices Dogar, Soomro, and Mohammad Asif should not be recognized as IHC judges until they take fresh oaths under Article 194 of the Constitution.

The appeal contends that the Islamabad High Court Act 2010 allows for appointments from other provinces but does not mention transfers. It further argues that the Supreme Court’s June 19 ruling misinterpreted Article 200(1), asserting that judicial transfers under this provision are meant to be temporary, not permanent.

As the legal tussle continues, the reshuffle has intensified tensions within the IHC, raising questions over judicial independence and administrative authority.