SARDAR KARAM DAD KHAN versus CHAIRMAN, AJ&K COUNCIL/PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY AJ&K COUNCIL, ISLAMABAD
Article 42, EEE, GGG, & 43 and Writ 44 The appointment of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was challenged on the basis that, in the past, the appointment of the senior most Judge of the Supreme Court of JJ The Chief Justice was recommended by the Supreme Court, but in the present case, after contempt of the proceedings, the respondent was appointed as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, in which the most senior judge of the Supreme Court applied as the highest judge. It was further stated that the appointment of a senior judge of the Supreme Court as Chief Justice will be made. The Interim Constitution of Azad Jammu and Kashmir was not only in accordance with the JJ&J Justice Act, but it also supported the established Constitutional Convention, which accepted the practice and practiced in Pakistan. Acknowledged using the Chief Justice's appointment options, and the lawyer for the AJ&K applicant further claimed that a judge could be overlooked more solely on the basis that he was unable to perform his duties properly. Was. Because of physical or mental impairment, the office or he was subjected to misconduct; otherwise, a judge could not be removed from office and could not be removed. Unlike other public positions, the judges of the higher courts are held accountable. Were not exempt from However, a superior constitutional body was provided for the removal of judges comprised of their own brothers on the following grounds, to prevent judges from being dragged to the ordinary courts or tribunals and to strengthen the concept of independence of the judiciary. In section 42E of the Supreme Judicial Council of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, a
