ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court registrar has returned a petition filed by former Islamabad High Court judge, Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui against his dismissal by the Supreme Judicial Council.
The registrar highlighted multiple reasons for not entertaining the petition filed by the former IHC judge including that the petitioner has not approached any other appropriate forum available to him under the law for the same relief and has also not provided any justification for not doing so.
The official stated that the certificate provided at page 30 of this constitution point does not fulfil the requirements of Order XXV Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980.
https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/pakistan/who-is-justice-shaukat-aziz-siddiqui/
‘The petitioner is invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution for the redressal of an individual grievance, which is not permissible in terms of judgment reported as 1998 SCMR 793 titled as Zulfiqar Mehdi Vs PIA etc,’ reads a letter attached to the petition returned to Advocate on Record, Ahmad Nawaz Chaudhry.
Mr Siddiqui, who was dismissed from service last month had challenged his sacking in the Supreme Court.
President Arif Alvi had terminated services of Mr Siddiqui after the Supreme Judicial Council found him guilty of misconduct over a speech he delivered at the Rawalpindi Bar Association.
https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/headline/justice-shaukat-siddiqui-removed-from-ihc-after-presidents-approval/
In his petition, Mr Siddiqui contended that he had been sacked without a due process and without [the SJC] fulfilling legal prerequisites.
No inquiry had been conducted into my remarks regarding alleged interference by the country’s premier spy agency in the judicial proceedings, Siddiqui had contended.
Mr Siddiqui had, in his speech, alleged that the country’s spy agency was meddling into the affairs of judiciary and benches were formed at the directives issued by the state institutions.
Supreme Judicial Council had taken notice of his speech, following which he was sacked. Another reference was also pending against him regarding the renovation of official residence.
