' While we are seized of these Constitution Petitions, Chief Justices of the Provincial High Courts have intimated the dates when the Additional Judges appointed in the High Courts will complete period of one year tenure. They have requested that steps be taken so that they may continue performing their duties as Additional Judges. Details of the learned Additional Judges along with the date of completion of period of one year for which they were appointed under the old system of appointment of Judges are as follows:.- HIGH COURT OF BALOCHISTAN [6 September, 20101
(1) Mr. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail
(2) Mrs. Justice Tahira Safdar
(3) Mr. Justice Mohammad Noor Meskanzai
(4) .Mr. Justice Ghulam Mustafa Mengal PESHAWAR HIGH COURT [6 September, 2010]
(1) Mr. Justice Abdul Aziz Kundi
(2) Mr. Justice Fasih-ul-Mulk
(3) Mr. Justice Liaqat Ali Shah
(4) Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel
(5) Mr. Justice Attaullah Khan
(6) Mr. Justice Muhammad Safdar Khan
(7) Mr. Justice Miftahuddin Khan LAHORE HIGH COURT [14 September, 2010]
(1) Mr. Justice Asad Munir
(2) Mr. Justice Sagheer Ahmad Qadri
(3) Mr. Justice Mansoor Akbar Kokab
(4) Mr. Justice Nasir Saeed Sheikh
(5) Mr. Justice Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari
(6) Mr. Justice Sh. Najam ul Hasan
(7) Mr. Justice Tariq Javaid
(8) Mr. Justice Kh. Imtiaz Ahmad
(9) Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik
(10) Mr. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood
(11) Mr. Justice ljaz ul Ahsan
(12) Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah; HIGH COURT OF SINDH [24 September, 2010]
(1) Mr. Justice Bhajandas Tejwani
(2) Mr. Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa
(3) Mr. Justice Ghulam Sarwar Korai
(4) Justice Ms. Rukhsana Ahmad
(5) Mr. Justice Tufail H. Ebrahim
(6) Mr. Justice Ahmed All Sheikh
(7) Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan
(8) Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
(9) Mr. Justice Munib Akhtar
2. The Supreme Court Bar Association has also filed Miscellaneous Application praying therein for suspension of the constitutional provisions challenged in these petitions. The letters received from the learned Chief Justices of High Courts could not be taken up on the administrative side as the matter is sub judice before the Court. Therefore, on the note of the Registrar, the same were ordered to be fixed before the Court as Civil Miscellaneous Applications in the petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association. The President, Balochistan Bar Association has also moved an application requesting almost for the same relief. Notice was given to the learned Attorney General for Pakistan. He sought time to seek instructions. He submitted that as per his instructions, within two or three days, the Government is about to constitute the Parliamentary Committee and he also stated that suspension of constitutional provisions would not be possible. Messrs Rashid A. Rizvi and Qazi Muhammad Anwar, Senior Advocates Supreme Court in Constitution Petition No. 14 of 2010 state that the facts and circumstances of the case necessitate for passing an interim order in order to avoid any legal and constitutional complications because the Judges who have served for a period of one year have got expectancy for their permanent appointment, but their cases could not betaken up as the matter is sub judice before this Court.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Attorney-General for Pakistan and the President of Balochistan Bar Association and have also considered the contents of the letters. We are mindful of the fact that the issues raised in the instant petitions are of vital importance.
Therefore, full opportunity is to be extended to everyone who is before the Court to put forward his viewpoint and as hearing of the case is still continuing and it cannot be said with certainty as to how much time would be required to conclude the case. We are conscious that it is not for the first time that this Court, while hearing a case relating to the vires of the constitutional provisions, is called upon to pass an interim order as it has been prayed in the instant application. Earlier, in the case of Wukala Mahaz v. Federation of Pakistan. (PLD 1998 SC 1263), in view of the facts and circumstances involved therein, this Court granted an interim order, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-- "(2) On 27th of October, 1997, notice to the Attorney-General for Pakistan was issued by a Bench of this Court which was headed by the then Hon'ble Chief Justice for 28-10-1997. On 29th of October, 1997, following order was passed: - "We have heard the learned Attorney-General for Pakistan we enquired from him about the time- frame to which he replied that he would be good for the day. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, is also preset in the Court and states that he would argue on behalf of the Federation and would take about two days. Syed Zafar Ali Shah, M.N.A., is also present in the Court and has filed an application for implement as a party in the matter as he is directly affected by the subject-matter of this case.
' Initially we were of the view that the proceedings should be concluded and final order should be passed, but it appears that now it is not possible as the hearing is to take place in detail for which sufficient time is required and secondly the session of National Assembly has been called today which will commence at 6-00 p.m. In the circumstances some order of interim relief is very essential.
' It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that Article 63A of the Constitution is not anti-defection law, but in essence it is anti-dissent and is violative of Articles 2A, 19, 55, 63, 66, 68 and 95 of the Constitution. Members of Parliament feel that in presence of the provisions mentioned above, if they speak freely and express their candid opinion according to their conscience and if that happens to be contrary to the policy of the ruling party, penal action would be taken, and they would lose their seats.
' In such circumstances we deem it fit and proper to grant interim relief in the terms that no adverse action shall be allowed to be taken against any Member of Parliament in pursuance of newly added Article 63A which is impugned in these petitions. This order shall remain operative till the final disposal of the petitions."
4. It is to be noted that non-appointment of the learned Additional Judges on completion of period of -one year on which date when they were appointed is likely to give rise to constitutional complications, particularly with reference to Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as per facts noted hereinabove.
5. Learned Attorney General for Pakistan, however, when asked to assist the Court as its officer, stated that he has conveyed the instructions, but his personal view is that without suspending constitutional provision, under some interim arrangement, the Additional Judges of the High Court can be allowed to continue to perform their duties in all the four Provinces.
6. Thus, after having considered the facts and circumstances of the . Case, and in order to avoid any constitutional void, and other complications we direct that let the learned Additional Judges of all the four High Courts continue to perform their functions as Additional Judges till further orders subject to final decision of the case in the instant petitions. The application filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association, Balochistan Bar Association and the letters received from the respective High Courts stand disposed of.
Sd/- Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, C.J., Sd/- Javed Iqbal, J Sd/- Mian Shakirullah Jan, J Sd/- Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, J Sd/- Nasir-ul-Mulk, J Sd/- Raja Fayyas Ahmed, J Sd/- Muhammad Sair Ali, J Sd/- Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, J Sd/- Jawwad S. Khawaja, J Sd/- Anwar Zaheer Jamali, J Sd/- Khilji Arif Hussain, J Sd/- Rehmat Hussain Jafferi, J Sd/- Tariq Parvez Khan, J Sd/- Mian Saqib Nisar, Sd/- Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J Sd/- Ghulam Rabbani, J Sd/- Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, J