PESHAWAR: A woman lawyer from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has once again moved the Supreme Court of Pakistan against the present terms and conditions for appointment of additional district and sessions judges, claiming the appointments are not only against all canons of justice and fair play but also the very essence of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Judicial Service Rules 2001.
Kiran Ayub Tanoli, a high court lawyer from Abbottabad, has filed an application in her main writ petition in the Supreme Court through her lawyer Tariq Aziz.
The lawyer prayed before the apex court to suspend an advertisement of the Peshawar High Court, issued on August 11, about the posts of additional district and sessions’ judges with the same terms and condition that is subjudice and already challenged in the Supreme Court.
It was submitted in the application that the Peshawar High Court (PHC) had re-advertised the posts of additional district and sessions judges with the same terms and conditions of Wakalatnamas (power of attorneys) except with two additional amendments, which are pending before the apex court.
The lawyer submitted that in previous appointments of additional district and session judges the condition of at least five attested Wakalatnamas per year of the decided cases of last five years independently conducted by the candidate before High Court or District Courts was challenged in the SC and she was allowed to sit in the examination.
This time again, she said, the PHC used the same terms and condition with addition of reducing the minimum age limit up to 33 and also candidates from Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) can also apply for the posts.
It was also submitted in the application that Fata is still part and parcel of the federal government therefore including candidates from Fata in the judges posts of KP is also against the very conditions of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution.
The petitioner said in the application the subject matter is pending before the apex court and re-advertising the posts with the same terms and conditions was against all canons of justice and fair play and even otherwise the same conditions have not been placed before the administrative committee as per the High Court Rules and neither the same have been passed and published in accordance with law.
The applicant pointed out that the said rules for the appointments of additional district and session’s judges were also against the very essence of the KP Judicial Service Rules, 2001.
The female lawyer prayed before the apex court to suspend the advertisement till a final disposal of the petition pending before the court.
The Supreme Court had already allowed the petitioner in the previous posts of additional district and sessions’ judges when she was not called for an interview with the reason that her five Wakalatnamas per year were not completed in last five years as she was abroad for further education in profession.
The female lawyer had also challenged the appointments of additional district and sessions judges, who had failed one paper like her in the written exam.
