Appointment of high court acting chief judge challenged in Pakistan

A petition has been filed in Pakistan's Peshawar High Court (PHC) challenging the appointment of Justice Attique Shah as acting chief justice, alleging a violation of judicial seniority.

Mufti Noor-ul-Basr, the petitioner, argues that a junior judge was appointed while a more senior judge was overlooked. He claims the move violates the Constitution and undermines judicial independence.

The petition calls for Justice Shah’s appointment to be set aside and for the senior-most judge to be appointed in his place.

The petition names the federal government, president, prime minister, Judicial Commission, and the Ministry of Law as respondents.

Sulaman Shah, the petitioner's counsel, contends that the appointment contravenes multiple constitutional provisions, including Articles 2-A, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10-A, 11, 14, 24, 25, 27, 35, 37, and 227 of the Constitution of Pakistan.

The controversy arose on February 12, when the president approved Justice Shah’s appointment following the elevation of Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim to the Supreme Court. Justice Shah, the second-most senior judge at PHC, was appointed over senior puisne judge Justice Ijaz Anwar.

Who is Justice Attique Shah?

Justice Attique Shah has a legal background with ties to the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan’s current ruling party.

He served as Additional Attorney General during the PML-N government from 2013 to 2017 and was elected President of the PHC Bar Association three times—in 2006, 2009, and 2010.

In a significant ruling, Justice Shah authored the decision to withhold reserved seats from the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) or Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

He also directed the provincial government and the Speaker of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly to convene a session within 14 days to swear in elected members on reserved seats, in accordance with an Election Commission ruling.

The PHC has yet to issue a response regarding the petition challenging his appointment.

Concerns over judicial seniority

This follows an earlier petition by five senior judges of Pakistan’s Islamabad High Court which challenged the appointment of three recently transferred judges, calling the move unconstitutional.

In a petition filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, they urged the Supreme Court to overturn the transfers, arguing that the decision violated judicial independence, undermined the separation of powers, and disregarded seniority norms. The petitioners include Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Babar Sattar, Tariq Jahangiri, Saman Rafat, and Sardar Ejaz Ishaq.

The transfers, made under Article 200(1) via a notification on Feb. 1, 2025, placed Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfaraz Dogar—15th in seniority at the Lahore High Court—as the second-most senior judge at the IHC. Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro and Justice Muhammad Asif, transferred from Sindh and Balochistan high courts, were also elevated. The petition noted that the judges did not take a fresh oath before the IHC chief justice, as required by Article 194, and claims these changes unfairly displaced long-serving IHC judges.

The Supreme Court petition named Pakistan’s president, the federal government, and the Judicial Commission of Pakistan as respondents. It further highlighted concerns that the revised seniority roster, issued on Feb. 2, 2025, disrupted the court’s hierarchy, with Justice Dogar gaining senior puisne judge status two days later.