Latest news with #JusticeMinhas
Business Recorder
5 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Meeting of IATF, IPCC: IHC grants time to govt to submit reply
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), Thursday, granted time to the government to submit its reply regarding the meeting of Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF) and Inter-Provincial Coordination Committee on Narcotics Control and implementation of court's orders to authorities to immediately halt the couriers and food deliveries to students at educational institutions to curb narcotics. A single bench of Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas, on Thursday, issued the directions during hearing of a petition filed by Lakki Foundation, a civil society organisation, highlighting the alarming rise in drug addiction among students in Islamabad and seeking the inclusion of anti-narcotics awareness in the academic curriculum of Islamabad's schools and colleges. During the hearing, the Deputy Attorney General (DAG) appeared before the court and sought more time to submit the reply in this matter as counsel for the petitioner had previously contended that the IATF and Inter-Provincial Coordination Committee on Narcotics Control, constituted under the relevant Act, is one of the most important bodies responsible for regulating and ensuring effective control of narcotics throughout the country but no such meeting of IATF held. At this, the DAG was directed to submit a report indicating when the last meeting of the Council was held and the decisions taken therein. Similarly, Shafqat Ghafar, counsel for respondent No 9, had appeared and sought time to file a comprehensive report regarding the inclusion of narcotics related information in the curriculum. On the last hearing, expressing serious concern that drugs are being delivered to students under the guise of items like pizza and snacks Justice Minhas remarked, 'Children order pizza and receive drugs along with it.' He added, 'Stop all direct deliveries to students. Any school or college that fails to comply should face legal action.' Justice Minhas directed the authorities to monitor all courier services operating in and around educational institutions and ensure a ban on direct deliveries to students. Acceding to the plea of DAG, Justice Minhas deferred hearing of the case after Eid holidays directing the authorities to submit the report. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
CJ is ‘master of the roster': IHC judge
ISLAMABAD: Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas reaffirmed the exclusive role of Chief Justice as the 'Master of the Roster' and highlighted the judiciary's structural safeguards against forum shopping. In a 19-page verdict, Islamabad High Court judge, Justice Minhas, dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a case between benches, declaring such requests 'inherently non-maintainable' under constitutional and procedural law. Mudassir Malik had filed an application to secure transfer of the main writ petition directly to another bench of this court comprising Justice Babar Sattar. Upon which, the office raised objection that how this application regarding bench fixation can be entertainable and placed it before this single bench of Justice Minhas as an objection case. The grounds raised by the applicant and the arguments by the counsel of the applicant primarily revolved around the premise that an earlier writ petition on the same subject matter is pending before another bench of this court; hence, comity and propriety demand that the instant writ be also transferred to that bench. The verdict reaffirmed the CJ's exclusive role as the 'Master of the Roster' and highlighted the judiciary's structural safeguards against forum shopping. Justice Minhas noted, 'A litigant's right is to approach the court, not to choose their judge. The latter is a privilege reserved to the Master of the Roster alone.' Petitioner's counsel, Advocate Muhammad Umer Khan Vardag, argued that consolidating the cases before a single bench was essential to uphold 'judicial comity' and to avoid conflicting rulings, particularly as the respondent was allegedly attempting to circumvent a stay order issued in the earlier petition. The IHC registrar initially objected to the transfer request, questioning its legal foundation. The matter was subsequently referred to Justice Minhas's bench as an 'objection case'. In his judgement, Justice Minhas cited Article 202 of the Constitution, which empowers high courts to frame rules governing their own practice and procedure. According to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) Rules, the chief justice alone holds the authority to constitute benches and allocate cases. Reaffirming the 'Master of the Roster' doctrine, the judge emphasised the chief justice's role as the 'exclusive conduit' for assigning cases. It cited the Supreme Court ruling in the Muhammad Wasay Tareen vs Chief Justice of Balochistan case, which held that litigants have no right to demand adjudication before a specific bench. Pakistani precedents, such as Benazir Bhutto vs President of Pakistan, were cited to dismiss indirect challenges to judicial impartiality disguised as procedural transfer requests. Justice Minhas cautioned that such petitions, even when carefully framed, implicitly question the fairness or competence of the presiding judge. 'Such applications; however, artfully worded imply a veiled objection to the judge. This undermines judicial discipline and the sanctity of bench assignments,' he wrote. The verdict said that the allocation of benches is an administrative act, not a judicial one, and that judges exercise jurisdiction only after a case has been formally entrusted to them by the chief justice. It added that turning now to the well-established doctrine of the 'Master of the Roster,' authoritative clarity and jurisprudential guidance can be drawn from Indian judicial precedent, which has developed a comprehensive framework on the subject. The principle has been unequivocally affirmed by Justice Dipak Misra, the 45th Chief Justice of India, who emphatically stated that 'The Chief Justice is the master of the roster and he alone has the prerogative to constitute the benches of the court and allocate cases to the benches so constituted.' 'The chief justice's prerogative to constitute benches is not a mere tradition but a constitutional necessity. To dilute this power would invite chaos and erode public confidence in the judiciary,' the judgement concluded. It added that for what has been discussed above, the office objection is sustained and it is held that any petition or application seeking transfer of a case from one bench to other is not maintainable. This objection case be made part of the main file. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
