SINDH HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCATION, THROUGH HONORARY SECRETARY versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, ISLAMABAD
Appointment of judges of the principles of the High Court Counsel in Arts 193 and 1976, not following the recommendations of the Chief Justice of the relevant High Court and giving no reasons for such disallowance and consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. Without approval, the appointment of the High Court as Permanent Judge of the High Court and notification of the extension of 6 months as Additional Judge was not based on the necessary consultation, as was read by the Constitution on the Judge's case PLD 1996 SC 324 in which it It was reported that consultation should be a consultative process. It should be effective, meaningful, discriminatory, inconsistent and proportionate, even with the Consulates and the Executive, with no scope for complaining of arbitrary or unfair play and that the views of every Consul are bound to the Executive and such In case the executive disagrees. The opinion of any consulate, it was required to present strict reasons, is related to the High Court and the Chief Justice of Pakistan will be bound by the executive views of the judicial consulates in connection with the appointment of a High Court Judge, Chief Justice of Pakistan. Has to contend with the views of the Chief Justice of the High Court that the court is concerned with, which can be withdrawn with effective, meaningful, objective and unanimous consent through a joint consultation process if the recommendations of the Chief Justice of Pakistan are such If not implemented, the Executive shall not be bound to make such recommendations and if the Executive makes such recommendations He admits, it would be fair to be unfairly linked to the recommendations of the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Chief Justice of Pakistan jointly expressed the law and principles on the subject. \ R \ n
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
