Order based on incorrect application of law doesn’t cast doubt on judge’s integrity: LHC

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) held that passing an order based on an incorrect application of law cannot cast doubt on the integrity of the judicial officer.

The court observed that a judicial officer while hearing a case is at liberty to decide the same by applying the law on the facts thereof based on the available record.

A decision passed by any judge may ultimately turn out to be wrong and be set aside by a higher judicial forum, the court added.

The court passed this order in a petition of an Additional District and Sessions Judge Zahar Hussain Bhatti, who approached the court against a decision to impose a penalty of withholding promotion for three years for granting post-arrest bail beyond the jurisdiction.

The court allowed the appeal and set aside the orders qua imposing the penalty of withholding promotion and declining the appellant’s request for grant of proforma promotion.

The court held that the appellant is entitled to the grant of proforma promotion and consequent monetary benefits as per law.

The court observed that in the present case, there is no supporting material to establish any extraneous considerations on the part of the appellant.

The impugned order was passed on the allegations of inefficiency and misconduct, but no efforts were made to substantiate these allegations.

The court said the impugned order is unsustainable in the eye of the law as the allegations of inefficiency and misconduct were not proved.

The court observed record shows that the appellant was promoted to District and Sessions Judge, on the recommendations of the Provincial Judicial Selection Board; however, subsequently the appellant’s promotion was ordered to be withheld, retrospectively.

The court said, admittedly, recommendations of a duly convened Provincial Judicial Selection Board were in favour of the appellant, and hence it was not the case of the respondent that the appellant was short of eligibility criteria for the promotion.

The court said, overlooking the fact that the promotion already stood notified by the competent authority which was neither rescinded nor recalled.

The judicial independence of the subordinate judiciary is required to be observed and respected at all costs and the inquiry officer must tread extremely cautiously in such matters otherwise it would have a chilling effect on the working of the subordinate judiciary in performing their judicial functions freely and fairly, the court concluded.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024