MUHAMMAD YOUNAS TAHIR versus SHAUKAT AZIZ, ADVOCATE, MUZAFFARABAD
Article (43 (a)) of the High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir: Appointment of Judges Consult the President with the Chief Justice High Court and the Chief Justice Azad Jammu and Kashmir Scope President at the same time. The theory of Azad Jammu and Kashmir President consulted with the Chief Justice High Court and Chief Justice of Azad Jammu and Kashmir in December 2005; the Chief Justice of the High Court recommended the names of the appellants, but the Chief Justice did not agree to recommend the names of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. After that, the new President was elected and in December 2006, the Chief of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The Justice (the same judge / person who was the Chief Justice of the High Court during the consultation) suggested the names of the appellants for the appointment of the former President, while the acting Chief Justice of the High Court was not consulted at that time. The President made such consultation with a person in the capacity of the Chief Justice of the High Court and consulted with the new President, after one term, with the same person in the capacity of the Chief Justice of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. , Which can be considered as a legitimate consultation scheme of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act of 1974, shows that both the chief justice should be consulted at the same time and Neither consultation would be meaningless in the present case both the chiefs would be consulted. Justice was not simultaneous but was involved for more than a year at different times, therefore, it could not be called a proper consultation, especially after the High Court Chief Justice's greatness, no consultation was made. The court was made with the then acting Chief Justice when a judge was appointed in the High Court when he
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
