Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri on Wednesday approached the Federal Constitutional Court, challenging an Islamabad High Court (IHC) order that declared maintainable a quo warranto petition questioning his eligibility to hold office as an IHC judge.
Separately, an application has been filed before the Islamabad High Court by Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri seeking the formation of a ‘full court’ and the recusal of certain judges, including Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar.
The application states that the writ petition challenging his appointment on the ground of an allegedly invalid law degree was taken up and proceeded with under the administrative and judicial authority of Chief Justice Dogar, even though the chief justice’s own transfer and appointment to the IHC had earlier been challenged by the applicant and “remains sub judice before the Federal Constitutional Court”.
It further states that Chief Justice Dogar “not only fixed the matter before a bench headed by himself” but also passed restraining and procedural orders “in haste”, creating “an appearance of bias”.
Citing these circumstances and the public importance of questions relating to judicial appointments and court functioning, the application maintains that the matter ought to be heard by a full court of the Islamabad High Court, excluding the chief justice and other judges whose transfers were challenged, to ensure “transparency, impartiality and public confidence in the administration of justice”.
Separately, according to the civil petition for leave to appeal filed before the FCC, Justice Jahangiri has assailed the December 9, 2025, order passed by a division bench of the IHC in Writ Petition, filed by advocate Mian Dawood. The bench “declared the petition maintainable and issued notice to him with a direction to submit a reply within three days.”
In his petition, Justice Jahangiri contended that the IHC order on the maintainability of the case, a September 16 order barring him from judicial work, and the “unnecessary haste with which the division bench is proceeding” against him “make it clear that the bench, in particular the honourable Chief Justice [Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar] of the Islamabad High Court, is biased against” him.
Read: Justice Jahangiri challenges Dogar-led bench over bias
In his petition, Justice Jahangiri contended that the IHC order was passed “without affording him an opportunity of hearing, while individuals who were not parties to the case were heard on the question of maintainability.” He argued that this violated his fundamental right to due process guaranteed under Article 10A of the Constitution.
The petition states that the writ before the Islamabad High Court challenges his appointment as a judge on the basis of an alleged “invalid LLB degree,” a matter which, according to Justice Jahangiri, involves “disputed questions of fact that cannot be adjudicated by a high court without recording evidence.” He maintained that such issues fall within the jurisdiction of a trial court and that “the high court lacks authority to record evidence in quo warranto proceedings.”
The petition further notes that the IHC, while declaring the writ maintainable, relied on a report submitted by the University of Karachi “without examining its validity or allowing Justice Jahangiri to contest it.” It added that proceedings and decisions of the University of Karachi regarding his degree, including actions taken by its Unfair Means Committee, Syndicate, and subsequent declarations, “are already under challenge before the Sindh High Court, where those proceedings have been suspended.”
Read More: IHC defends division bench in plea against Justice Jahangiri
Justice Jahangiri also highlighted that the alleged events concerning his degree relate to examinations conducted decades ago and that the allegations raised against him are “purely factual in nature, requiring a full trial.” He denied the allegations and stated that “his credentials have remained on record throughout his legal career, including during his enrolment as an advocate and subsequent judicial appointments.”
Through the petition, filed by Advocate Uzair Bhandari, Justice Jahangiri sought leave to appeal, conversion of the petition into an appeal, setting aside of the IHC’s December 9 order, and dismissal of the writ petition for being non-maintainable.
