PHC puts on notice CJ, others in appointments case
PESHAWAR: A division bench of the Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Thursday put on notice chief justice, administrative committee of the high court and Supreme Judicial Council in a writ petition challenging appointments of registrar and an additional registrar from the bureaucracy in the high court.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Ikramullah Khan and Justice Muhammad Ayub Khan issued notice to respondents in the petition including Mohammad Saleem Khan (registrar), Zakaullah Khattak (additional registrar), the high court administrative committee through the registrar, the PHC chief justice through principal staff officer, provincial government through law secretary and the Supreme Judicial Council through its secretary.
The court issued the notice in the writ petition filed by a lawyer, Ali Azim Afridi, who requested the court to declare as unconstitutional the amendments made in the relevant rules last year to allow appointment of a civil servant of the provincial or federal government as registrar and additional registrar (administration).
To a question from the court if the notice can be issued to chief justice and high court, the lawyer cited judgement of the Supreme Court (PLD 2016 SC page 961) related to the appointments in Islamabad High Court in which he explained that the SC court had declared that high court and chief justice could be made parties in suchlike case.
The lawyer argued that the appointments were against the constitutional provision related to separation of judiciary from the executive
The petitioner stated that the appointment of the high court registrar Mohammad Saleem Khan (BS-20) and additional registrar (administration) Zakaullah Khattak (BS-19) through a notification on February 1, 2017, was illegal and without any lawful authority.
The petitioner submitted that the said two appointments impinge upon the notion of independence of judiciary.
The lawyer also requested that the administrative committee of the high court may be tried for committing contempt of court as it has violated judgments of the Supreme Court on the said subject.
He pointed out that the cases of the judges of the administrative committee may also be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council.
-
'Hotel Transylvania 5' Gets Major Update By Film's Star -
PlayStation Plus Adds Over 300 Hours Of Gameplay Across Massive New Titles -
Mandy Moore On Mom Friendships Amid Ashley Tisdale's Mom Group Claims -
Justin Baldoni Objects To Removing Taylor Swift's Name From Case -
Princess Eugenie, Beatrice Warned About Royal Titles After They Turn Down Prince William's Request -
Samsung One UI 8.5 Adds Fully Customisable Unlock Animations -
Injured By Bullets, New York Father-son Duo Beat Alleged Gunman With A Bat -
Annular Solar Eclipse 2026: Here's Everything To Know About The ‘ring Of Fire’ -
Blake Lively Gives Up Hopes Of Taylor Swift Reconciliation? -
Advocacy Groups Take Aim At Elon Musk, Urging Google, Apple To Remove X, Grok -
BAFTA Nominees For 2026 Rising Star Award Revealed: See Full List -
Kate Middleton 'quietly And Carefully' Planning Prince William's Coronation -
'Glee' Star Slams Hilary Duff’s Husband Over 'petty' Remarks About THIS Actress -
Chinese Parents Turn To AI Tutors To Ease Homework Stress -
Fire Crews Bring Massive Wolverhampton Factory Blaze Under Control -
Britney Spears Obsessed With Prince William And Harry?