The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Monday dismissed the intra-court appeals (ICAs) filed by five Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges and others against the Supreme Court’s verdict regarding the transfer of judges, upholding the SC’s June ruling. The FCC also rejected the petitioners’ request to return their ICA to the Supreme Court on grounds of non-compliance, noting that none of the petitioners appeared before the bench despite repeated notices. The miscellaneous petition had been filed by Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kiyani, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Justice Saman Riffat Imtiaz of the IHC, arguing that the matter fell within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and should be heard there. The case was taken up by a six-member larger bench of the FCC, headed by Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justice Syed Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Justice K.K. Agha, Justice Aamer Farooq, Justice Ali Baqir Najafi, Justice Rozi Khan Barrech and Justice Arshad Hussain Shah. During the hearing, the bench dismissed the request to return the ICA, citing non-compliance and absence of the petitioners. The underlying case pertains to the transfers of Justice Sarfraz Dogar (Lahore High Court), Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro (Sindh High Court), and Justice Muhammad Asif (Balochistan High Court) to the Islamabad High Court. The Karachi Bar Association, the IHC Bar Association, and others had challenged these transfers in the Supreme Court, which had already upheld them as constitutional in June. Following the SC decision, the five IHC judges filed an ICA, which was later transferred to the newly established FCC under the 27th Constitutional Amendment — a move the judges also contested. In their plea, the judges argued that their ICA did not fall under Articles 175E or 175F of the Constitution, and therefore could not have been transferred to the FCC. They maintained that their appeal was filed under Section 5 of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023, and the 27th Amendment did not amend or supersede this Act. The judges stressed that Article 175F(2) only transfers appeals that fall specifically under the FCC’s jurisdiction, and since their appeal was not filed under the constitutional articles cited, its transfer “carries no legal force.” They further submitted that the appeal was originally filed before the Supreme Court but had been listed before the FCC following the introduction of Article 175F(2) through the Constitution (27th Amendment) Act, 2025 — a provision they argue is itself unconstitutional. Consequently, the five IHC judges requested that their appeal be returned to the Supreme Court, asserting that both the transfer and the amendment enabling it lacked lawful authority. Meanwhile, in the ICA filed back in June, the IHC judges had urged that the Constitutional Bench’s order should be “recalled and set-aside […] in the interest of justice”. “During the pendency of the instant appeal, this Hon’ble Court may graciously grant interim relief as prayed for in the accompanying interim relief application. Any other relief that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be granted,” the plea mentioned.
FCC Upholds Supreme Court Verdict in Judges’ Transfer Case, All Appeals Dismissed
