The Supreme Court has returned the constitutional petitions filed by five judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), raising objections that the applications were based on personal grievances and did not meet the requirements of Article 184(3) of the Constitution.

According to sources, the Supreme Court’s Registrar Office noted that the judges had failed to identify any question of public importance or specify which fundamental rights had been infringed to justify invoking Article 184(3).

The objections further stated that the petitions appeared to be driven by personal differences.

The Registrar’s office cited the Zulfiqar Mehdi vs PIA case, which held that petitions cannot be filed under Article 184(3) on the basis of personal grudges.

It added that the essential ingredients of a valid constitutional petition were not fulfilled, as the judges neither gave solid reasons for filing nor clarified which parties should be issued notices.

On September 19, five IHC judges — Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, and Justice Ejaz Ishaq Khan — had filed separate petitions before the Supreme Court.

In their applications, the judges had requested the apex court to declare that administrative powers cannot be exercised to undermine or override the judicial authority of high court judges.

They argued that once a case is assigned to a bench, the chief justice of the High Court cannot reconstitute benches or transfer cases at will.

The petitions further contended that the chief justice has no authority to exclude judges from the roster arbitrarily or to use administrative powers to remove them from judicial duties.

The judges maintained that the constitution of benches, case transfers, and issuance of rosters must be done strictly in line with rules approved by all judges of the high court under Articles 202 and 192(1) of the Constitution.

The applicants also challenged administrative committees formed through notifications issued on February 3 and July 15, terming their creation and decisions as mala fide, unlawful, and void.

They urged the Supreme Court to declare the committees and all their actions unconstitutional.