SC dismisses petition of ex-LHC judge

The Supreme Court Thursday dismissed constitutional petition challenging the order of Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) wherein the services of Erum Sajjad Gul as judge of Lahore High Court (LHC) were not confirmed. Erum Gul was appointed as additional judge of the LHC in June 2015 along with nine other persons, but the JCP in May 2017 declined to extend her service as permanent judge of the LHC.
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar heard the petition, filed by former Justice Nasira Javed Iqbal, challenging the order of JCP, dated May 5, 2017 by non-confirming Erum Sajjad Gul of the LHC. The court dismissed the petition with the ruling when the Chief Justice of Pakistan has found a judge not competent to hold the office then what is left for filing a petition in this regard.
"We did not find competent the instant petition hence it is dismissed," said the Chief Justice after hearing the arguments of former Justice Nasira's counsel Shah Khawar. He argued that the instant petition is quite important on the touchstone of Article 184(3) of the Constitution as both the Judicial Commission of Pakistan and Parliamentary Committee on the Appointment of Judges have been established under the Article 175A of Constitution.
He recalled that in the famous Munir Hussain Bhatti case PLD 2011, the apex court had held that the decision of Parliamentary Committee on the Appointment of Judges is subject to judicial review. "My stance is that if the decision of Parliamentary Committee is subject to judicial scrutiny then why not of Judicial Commission of Pakistan," Khawar contended.
He further submitted that the petition specifically stressed on Article 175-A of the Constitution as he said that in the present case, the services of six judges were confirmed by the Judicial Commission but the service of Justice Erum Sajjad Gul was not confirmed after two years.
He contended that the Parliamentary Committee on Appointment of Judges had also expressed its reservations over the decision of the JCP and recommended to review its decision but it was not accepted. The Chief Justice questioned as to how a person can say that he is a capable judge, adding the JCP did not find the said additional judge competent to hold the office and hence the instant petition is dismissed.