ISLAMABAD:
Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) Justice Babar Sattar has noted that the IHC chief justice has no authority to determineon the administrative side or otherwiseas to whether a bench ought to hear a case or not.
“Once a case is set down for hearing before a single or division bench, it is for such a bench to determine whether circumstances arise for the case to be transferred to another bench, including on grounds of recusal of a judge comprising the bench,” the judge stated in a three-page order.
An IHC bench including Justice Sattar on March 14 determined that it would be in the interest of justice if another bench heard a case. The file of the case was, however, “inexplicably” returned to the docket of the bench.
The file contained remarks recorded on the administrative side by IHC Acting Chief Justice Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar that the case was to be heard by the same bench.
Commenting on the development, Justice Sattar stated that the return of the case to this bench “must have been an inadvertent mistake made by the Registrar’s office and/or the staff of the office of the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice.”
He said once the judge comprising a bench determines that he/she would not like to hear the case for reasons stated, the said judicial order is not amenable to interference by the office of the chief justice or registrar considering it an administration matter.
“The obligation to fix urgent and ordinary cases before available benches falls within the domain of the Deputy Registrar under the High Court Rules adopted by the IHC.
“The responsibility of the Chief Justice is to approve the roster of the benches of the court prepared by the deputy registrar. But once such a roster is prepared and approved, the chief justice has no role to play in the fixation of each and every case filed in the court.
“It is only where a bench seized of a case opines that a larger or special bench be constituted to hear the matter that the matter must be referred to the chief justice, as the High Court Rules vest in his office the authority to approve the roster of benches,” he added.
Justice Sattar stated that the present practice of referring the matter of a bench’s desire to recuse themselves from hearing a case to the chief justice for reassignment and transfer from one court to another is not in accordance with the High Court Rules.
“In case of recusal or where the need arises to transfer a case out of the docket of the bench seized of it, the matter ought to be marked to the deputy registrar for placement before another available bench, in view of the roster of sitting of benches approved by the chief justice.
“Let the file, therefore, be sent to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, who will ensure that it is fixed before another available bench according to the approved roster of sitting of benches, that does not comprise any of the judges [of the existing bench that heard the matter],” he added.
