Gillani Vspk

Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani v/s Government of Pakistan BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Constitutional Jurisdiction)Const. Petition No. /2009 JusticeSyed Manzoor Hussain Gillani s/o Syed Hassan Shah Gillani, r/o 1-Shaukat Line, opposite Neelam Stadium, Muzaffarabad, Azad Kashmir. Petitioner Versus 1. Government of Pakistan through Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Prime Minister Secretariat, Islamabad 1.Prime Minister of Pakistan as Chairman Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council through Secretary In charge, Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council, Secretariat, Islamabad2 1. Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad through its Secretary 1. Ministry for Kashmir Affairs & Northern Areas, Islamabad through its Secretary 1. The Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council, Secretariat II, Islamabad through its Secretary 1. Government of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, the Secretariat, Muzaffarabad, through its Chief Secretary 1. Department of Law, Justice, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights Azad Jammu & Kashmir through its Secretary 1. The Honable Mr. Justice Muhammad Riaz Akhtar Chaudhry, Chief Justice Azad Jammu & Kashmir Supreme Court, through Registrar Supreme Court Respondents CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 184(3) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973 READ WITH ORDER XXV OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES, 1980 Respectfully Sheweth:1. The petitioner is a law abiding citizen of Pakistan and the senior most judge of the Honable Supreme Court Azad Jammu & Kashmir having worked as such since August 2004. The petitioner has had an unblemished record of service not only as judge of the Supreme Court but as judge of the Azad Jammu & Kashmir High Court (1991-2001), as its Chief Justice (2001-2004) besides having held the offices of the Advocate General & Chief Election Commissioner, AJK, and the Vice Chancellor of the AJK University. He has immensely contributed to the development of law through judicial pronouncements of constitutional importance and wrote multiple articles published in the well respected journals of Pakistan besides being the author of three books on constitutional law; 2. The Government of Pakistan has assumed the responsibilities of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir territory, called local authority within the spirit of various U.N. Security Council and UNCIP Resolutions and its administration is regulated for the time being under the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the Interim Constitution Act, which is given by the Government of Pakistan for the better Government and administration. The relevant part of the preamble of the Interim Constitution Act states that: AND WHEREAS, it is

necessary to provide for the better Government and administration of Azad Jammu and Kashmir until such time as the status of Jammu and Kashmir is determined as aforesaid and for that purpose to repeal and re-enact the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act, 1970, with certain modifications; AND WHEREAS, in the discharge of its responsibilities under the UNCIP Resolution, the Government of Pakistan has approved of the proposed repeal and re-enactment of the said Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act, 1970, and authorized the President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir to introduce the present Bill in the Legislative Assembly of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for consideration and passage. (Underlining is added for the sake of emphasis) 1. The Interim Constitution Act visualizes trichotomy of legislative and executive powers distributed between the Government of Pakistan directly, as well as indirectly through the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council, which is headed by the Prime Minister of Pakistan as its Chairman while the powers of the local governance vest in the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government. The Prime Minister of Pakistan is defined in sub-section (14) of Section 21 of the Interim Constitution Act as follows:-(14) The word The Prime Minister of Pakistan wherever occurring in this section shall be deemed to include the person for the time being exercising the powers and performing the functions of the Chief Executive of Pakistan. The powers vested in the Government of Pakistan and the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council under different sections and schedule III of the Interim Constitution Act are excluded from the purview of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Assembly and Government under sections 19, 21(7) and 31(2) of the Interim Constitution Act. Besides above, the Government of Pakistan has an overriding authority in relation to AJK under Section 56 of the Interim Constitution Act which is as follows:- 56. Act not to derogate from responsibilities of Pakistan. Nothing in this Act shall derogate from the responsibilities of the Government of Pakistan in relation to the matters specified in sub-section (3) of Section 31 or prevent the Government of Pakistan from taking such action as it may consider necessary or expedient for the effective discharge of those responsibilities 2. The Government of Pakistan has been making and dismissing the Governments of AJK under the authority of this provision.1. The executive authority of the Council is exercised by its Chairman, the Prime Minister of Pakistan (or the Chief Executive of Pakistan as the case may be), who performs his functions from Islamabad as a persona designate either directly or through the Secretariat of the Council located in Islamabad. Section 21(7) of the Interim Constitution Act is reproduced as follows: 21(7)The executive authority of the Council shall extend to all matters with respect to which the Council has power to make laws and shall be exercised in the name of the Council by the Chairman who may act either directly or through the Secretariat of the Council of which a Federal Minister nominated by the Chairman from amongst the members of the Council and not more than three advisors appointed by the Chairman shall be in charge. [underlining is added for the sake of emphasis] 1. That the Azad Jammu and Kashmir is assimilated in the mainstream of Pakistan for all practical purposes, including administration, economic and social developments etc. The Government of Pakistan has issued two successive notifications to this effect that Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall for all practical purposes be treated like any other province of Pakistan. These notifications have

been relied and acted upon in the cases reported as [PLJ 1999 AJK 1] and [PLD 2006 Law. 465]. Besides these notifications, AJK is a territory of Pakistan in terms of Article 1(2)(d) of the Constitution of Pakistan and therefore the Government of Pakistan is responsible for the overall governance of its territories;??????????? 1. That the Interim Constitution Act has, at least to the extent of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, settled the relationship with Pakistan, within the spirit of Article 257 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, pending final solution of the Kashmir imbroglio, and to give effect to this relationship, a special clause (2) is added in section 4(4)(7) of the Interim Constitution Act, overriding the fundamental right of freedom of association as: No person or political party in Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be permitted to propagate against or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to the ideology of the State’s accession to Pakistan. This clause has received the judicial assent also in the case Aftab Hussain vs. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly [reported as PLJ 1991 AJK 60]. 1. That the Judges of the Supreme Court and High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir are appointed by the President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir on the binding advice of the Prime Minister of Pakistan designated as Chairman of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council, in accordance with the process prescribed by sections 42 and 43 of the Interim Constitution Act respectively which are similar to corresponding provisions of Constitution of Pakistan. 1. That the petitioner was appointed as Judge of Azad Jammu and Kashmir High Court on 5thof May 1991 and its Chief Justice on May 4, 2001 and as one of the three judges of the Supreme Court, AJK in Aug 2004 on the advice of the Prime Minister of Pakistan, as Chairman of the AJK Council. 1. That after conducting elections for AJK Assembly in June 2006 as Chief Election Commissioner of AJK, the incumbent Chief Justice Supreme Court Justice Muhammad Riaz Akhtar Chaudhry (who was the Chief Justice of the AJK High Court at that time), was appointed as Judge in the Supreme Court of AJK on 26.9.2006 against a vacant position in the Supreme Court. 1. That the incumbent Chief Justice, who was six years junior in High Court and two years in the Supreme Court AJK as against the petitioner, was directed to be appointed as Chief Justice of the AJK Supreme Court on the mandatory advice of Prime Minister of Pakistan issued on 20.10.2006 and notified by the AJK Government on 21.10.2006 i.e. just within twenty four days of his appointment as Judge of the AJK Supreme Court clearly ignoring the seniority position of the petitioner as settled by the constitution, past conventions and the principles as laid down by the superior Courts of Pakistan. (Copies of advice and Notification are attached herewith). 11. That the Prime Minister of Pakistan had no legal or constitutional justification to advice the appointment of any person other than the petitioner, being the senior most Judge having an unblemished record of service, as the Chief Justice of AJK Supreme Court. 1. That as a result of illegal and unconstitutional appointment of the incumbent Chief Justice, the petitioner went on long leave in protest. A number of representations were made by the petitioner to the Prime Minister of Pakistan but the same have not received any heed or attention. That a

constitutional petition was filed by the practicing advocates of AJK Bar Councils before the High Court AJK challenging the illegal and unconstitutional appointment of the incumbent Chief Justice Supreme Court, but to the utter surprise and dismay of all, contempt proceedings through Registrar Supreme Court AJK were initiated against the Registrar High Court AJK for having entertained such constitutional petition. The original file/record was summoned and has thereafter been kept in custody by the Registrar office of the Supreme Court (acting under instructions of the incumbent Chief justice AJK Supreme Court) and to date after a lapse of more than two years no action had ever been taken on the same, clearly showing the influence and high handedness of the incumbent Chief Justice on the judicial system of AJK. That after the induction of the new democratic Government in Pakistan, a summary was submitted to the Prime Minister of Pakistan by the Secretary Kashmir affairs and Northern Division in charge AJK Council on 25.6.2008, through Secretary Ministry of Law & Justice, Pakistan, for revoking the advice issued for appointment of junior Judge and for a fresh advice for appointment of the petitioner, being the senior most judge, as Chief Justice Supreme Court, but it is procrastinated in Prime Minister of Pakistan Secretariat till now. That having no other remedy or forum available to protect his legal and constitutional rights from being prejudiced at the hands of the Government of Pakistan, acting through its Prime Minister and other ministries from their secretariats in Islamabad, the petitioner invokes the kind indulgence of this August Court being the ultimate arbiter of justice for the territories comprising Pakistan on the following grounds amongst other: GROUNDS: a. That the Prime Minister of Pakistan despite being the Chairman of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council was under an oath of the Constitution of Pakistan and while operating from Islamabad, was bound to follow the guidelines as laid down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in all the matters within his powers and authority in respect of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. He was bound to render advice for appointment of the Chief Justice Azad Kashmir in accordance with the judgments of the superior courts of Pakistan. In the words of Justice Ajmal Mian (as his lordship then was): since the interpretation of various articles by this Court becomes part of the Constitution and as it becomes the law, it is incumbent on all the Executive and Judicial Authorities throughout Pakistan to act in aid of the Supreme Court by virtue of Article 190. An advice under clause (1) of Article 48 of the Constitution therefore, cannot be in violation of the law as declared by this Court. In other words, if the advice tendered by the Prime Minister in respect of appointments of the Judges of the superior Courts is in accordance with the judgment of this Court in the Judges Case, it will be binding on the President. (Underlining is added for the sake of emphasis) [Al-Jehad Trust Case [PLD 1997 SC 84 at page 193] According to the well settled law, as laid down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the Judges Case (reported as PLD 1996 SC 324) and Malik Asad Alias Case (reported as PLD 1998 SC 161), only the senior most judges could have been appointed as the chief justice of the AJK Supreme Court in the absence of any justiciable reasons. Justice Irshad Hassan Khan in Malik Asad Alias case, while agreeing with the majority, stated: Clearly, the judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan are elevated from different High Courts of the Provinces because of their merit/seniority. It would therefore be wrong and unjust to choose a junior judge and put him at the top as Chief Justice of Pakistan in

violation of the principle of seniority which to be followed strictly in case of appointment of Chief Justice of Pakistan in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and in consonance with the well-established constitutional conventions. (Underlining is added for the sake of emphasis) [At page 362 of the Malik Asad Alias case reported as PLD 1998 SC 161] Thus the Prime Minister of Pakistan was not justified in advising the President to appoint the incumbent Chief Justice; b. That the overall constitutional scheme of the Interim Constitution Act (being pari materia to the Pakistani Constitution) envisages that the senior most judge has the legitimate right to be appointed as the Chief Justice. Even the appointment of Acting Chief Justice under section 43-A of the Interim Constitution contemplated that the senior most judge should perform such a function. This rule of propriety had to be honoured in all circumstances until concrete and solid reasons given/recorded and communicated by the Prime minister/Executive in writing were there. It was important to appoint the senior most judges as the Chief Justice otherwise, as in the words of Justice Manzoor Hussain Sial in the famous Judges Case: a Junior most Judge in the High Court may aspire to become Chief Justice of the High Court by passing his seniors and to, achieve this object resort to undesirable conduct by going out of his way to oblige the Government in power. If he succeeds in securing his appointment as Chief Justice by superseding his seniors, by resorting to such measures he will endanger the independence of Judiciary and destroy the public confidence in the Judiciary. [At- in the Judges case reported as PLD 1996 SC 324]. The wisdom bestowed in the Judges case was equally applicable in the case concerning the appointment of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as expressly held in Malik Asad Alias case reported as PLD 1998 SC 161]. c. That after the restoration of judiciary to its constitutional position of seniority and appointment of all the Chief Justices in the provinces according to the rule of seniority, AJK cannot be dealt with arbitrarily and the rightful petitioner as well as the people of AJK cannot be discriminated vis a vis their counter parts of the other provinces who sink and swim together. Besides its special nature under the UN Charter, AJK is assimilated in the main stream with Prime Minister of Pakistan as its head for all those subjects who are of federal nature. Hence judiciary in AJK cannot be administered in an unruly manner by applying double standards; d. That the appointment of the Chief Justice of the AJK on the binding advice of the Prime Minister of Pakistan is done wholly and solely by the Government of Pakistan, and the Government of AJK has minimal or effectively no role of whatsoever nature to play except the implementation of the decision taken by the Government of Pakistan, therefore the same deserves to be interfered with by this August Court. It is an established fact that in August 2006, the relevant ministry AJK Council Secretariat had recommended the petitioner only for appointment as the Chief Justice of AJK, no action was taken on the same. On the other hand, to the utter surprise, the Prime Minister of Pakistan on his official letter head and not on the letter head of the AJK Council used ordinarily (both are attached herewith) advised the appointment of the incumbent Chief Justice on 25/10/2006. Further on 25/06/2008, the Secretary AJK Council sent a summary for the Prime Minister of Pakistan for declaring the petitioner as the Chief Justice of AJK. It is pertinent to note that the said summary was not sent directly to the Prime Minister of Pakistan but has been routed through the Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice and Human Rights, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, meaning thereby that it is the Government of Pakistan which makes the decision with respect to the said appointment, AJK council is only a device. This fact was clearly stated by the law minister of the AJK on the Assembly floor on 10/01/2007 according to whom the appointment was not made by the Government of

AJK but Pakistan and the Government of AJK had absolutely no role to play in the whole process. Thus, the Government of Pakistan, as custodian of rights of the people of Pakistan, was required to act in all fairness of things by adhering to the provisions of the Constitution, constitutional conventions and principles of law as settled by this Honorable Court. e. That the Chief Executive of Pakistan is bound under the United Nations Security Council and all other international resolutions and conventions under which Pakistan has assumed the responsibility, to provide better administration and Government in AJK as regulated by the Interim Constitution Act, given by Pakistan itself. It has badly failed in discharging the responsibility by not providing and ensuring independence of judiciary, free of political considerations and ulterior designs, installed and based on transparent constitutional conventions recognized throughout the world and under domestic laws and precedents, calling for intervention of UN Security Council in case the unconstitutional actions are not rectified, bringing a bad name to the state of Pakistan; f. That the Government of Pakistan is a signatory to the universal declaration of human rights and is bound to carry into effect in letter and spirit all the provisions of the declaration particularly under Articles 7, 8, 10 and 21. The right visualized by these articles is particularly denied to the senior most Judge by not appointing him as Chief Justice of Azad Jammu and Kashmir; g. That the petitioner had an unblemished record of service throughout his life and there was no reason that he could have been ignored for appointment as the Chief Justice. Refusal to appoint the senior most Judge as Chief Justice is the violation of domestic and international law to equal access to public service and amounts to victimization of the petitioner at the hands of political figures which at all costs be eliminated; h. That the people of the State in general are denied the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunal composed of experienced, independent and impartial persons of integrity and undisputed character and antecedents; 1. The Government of Pakistan as a member of United Nations has a higher burden of responsibility to show that it works to secure and promote the independence of judiciary in the territory, and more so, in the disputed territory where its control is under UNCIP resolutions. By passing an advice which was contrary to the norms of justice and fairplay, the Government has breached its international obligations which must be corrected by this August Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction especially when the executive is adamant in not performing its due obligations bonafidely; That the appointment of the incumbent Chief Justice of the Honorable Supreme Court within three weeks of his appointment as judge of the Supreme Court is not a judicious exercise of the discretion vested in the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Public figures and bodies do not enjoy discretion which could be used by them at their whims and caprice by ignoring the settled principles of law. Their exercise of discretion cannot be equated with those of private individuals who may not be answerable to anyone but themselves. Where the Prime Minister of Pakistan advised the President Azad Jammu & Kashmir to appoint the incumbent Chief Justice, the same on the very face of the record was malafide, arbitrary and capricious exercise of his discretion being against the principles of law as laid down by the superior Courts of this land and therefore is liable to be set aside by this August Court; The manner in which the mandatory advice for appointment of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court AJK was issued by the Prime Minister of Pakistan has adversely affected the independence of judiciary and the confidence of the people in the rule of law and good governance, which cannot be allowed to sustain. That

the concept of the Independence of Judiciary connotes that the judges should be able to decide the cases free of any fear and favour. In the words of Justice Naseem Hassan Shah: The independence of the judiciary means: (a) that every Judge is free to decide matters before him in accordance with his assessment of the facts and his understanding of the law without improper influences, inducements or pressures, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason; and (b) that the Judiciary is independent of the Executive and Legislature, and has jurisdiction, directly or by way of review, over all issues of a judicial nature. (Underlining is added for the sake of emphasis) [At page 108 of Sharaf Faridia Case, reported as PLD 1994 SC 105] [Similar views were expressed by Justice Irshad Hassan Khan in Liaquat Hussain case [PLD 1999 SC 504 at page 807] Wherever the judiciary is open to any influence be that be political, financial or otherwise, right of the people to have access to justice is badly denied; That the judiciary of the Azad Jammu & Kashmir cannot be made slave to political pressures exerted by the Government of Pakistan to achieve ulterior designs of its favorites. The Government of Pakistan had itself guaranteed the provision of fundamental rights to its citizens by being a signatory to different declarations on human rights. It cannot be negated that the due process of law as enshrined in Article 4 of the Constitution of Pakistan inevitably requires an independent and impartial Court and Tribunal and unless judiciary is independent, the fundamental right of access to justice cannot be guaranteed [Aziz Ullah Memon Case, reported as PLD 1993 SC 341]; That the violation of the principles of law as enunciated by the superior Courts of Pakistan are liable to be rectified by the very authority which has passed the same, i.e. the Prime Minister of Pakistan in the instant case, either suo moto or on the application of the petitioner. No rights can be gained or protected on the basis of an order which is arbitrary, capricious and therefore illegal. It is trite law of this land that wherever an order is illegal, the same can be withdrawn the moment illegality comes to the notice of the authority passing the illegal order. But no action has been taken despite the lapse of almost three years and the people of AJK are made to suffer by the Government of Pakistan at the hands of a judiciary which by no score could be called independent; That the petitioner, who had gone on long leave as a protest was harassed, intimidated and pressurized to resign, deprived of lawful entitlement of staff, security and protocol. His kith and kins in the service were victimized. A malicious campaign of character assassination was unleashed against him with the connivance of the central Government officers and the incumbent Chief Justice, but the petitioner kept on bearing it as judge so that a symbol of resistance against injustice remains pricking to the conscience of those who witnessed and protested against it. The petitioner has repeatedly been making representations to the Prime Minister of Pakistan but his grievances have remained unattended since October 2006. That the illegal and unconstitutional appointment of the incumbent Chief Justice AJK Supreme Court gave rise to a recurring cause of action and until this August Court corrects the wrong, a continuous injustice will remain perpetrating and the people of Pakistan especially the AJK will remain deprived of their fundamental right of access to justice; That all executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan are bound to act in aid of the Supreme Court of Pakistan to carry into effect its directions in all matters including enunciation of principle of law and Supreme Court of Pakistan alone is competent to enforce its orders under Article 187, 189 and 190 of the Constitution of Pakistan throughout Pakistan and apprehend anybody and everybody for violating the

directions laid down by it; In view of above, it is most humbly prayed that: The advice dated 20/10/2006 for appointing Junior Judge of the Supreme Court AJK, Justice Muhammad Riaz Akhter Chaudhry as the Chief Justice AJK, and resultantly the appointment, be declared as illegal, unconstitutional and of no legal conseq9uence being contrary to Constitution, Constitutional conventions and the settled principles of law enunciated by this August Court; ii) The Prime Minister of Pakistan be directed to forthwith issue a fresh advice for appointment of the petitioner as the Chief Justice Supreme Court of AJK, with a direction to the President of the AJK to act upon the advice instantly; iii) The Government of Pakistan be directed to arrange suitable amendment in the Interim Constitution Act to deduct period during which the petitioner remained deprived of his right to hold the office of Chief Justice AJK, from his age of superannuation so as to prevent the spirit of the Constitution from being defeated and to prevent any such future adventurism; (iv) the Governments of Azad Jammu & Kashmir and Pakistan be directed to adequately compensate the petitioner for the violation of his legitimate constitutional right and for mental torture the petitioner and his family has undergone since October 2006. (v) Any other relief which this Honorable Court may find the petitioner entitled to may also be granted. Drawn & Filed by Arshad Ali Ch Advocate-on- Record CERTIFICATE Certified that no other Constitutional petition has been filed in the Supreme Court on the subject ADVOCATE-ON- RECORD Note. Mr. Mohammad Akram Sheikh, Senior Advocate will appear on behalf of the Petitioner. ADVOCATE-ON- RECORD 06-052009 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Constitutional Jurisdiction) Const. Petition No. /2009 Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani Petitioner Versus Government of Pakistan etc.... Respondents AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS I, Ch. Arshad Ali., Advocate-on- Record, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Islamabad, do solemnly hereby affirm and declare as under:That the facts contained in the accompanying Constitutional Petition are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief as per record of the case produced by the petitioner. SWORN at Islamabad this day of 06-05-2009 DEPONENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Constitutional Jurisdiction) Const. Petition no /2009 Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani Petitioner versus Government of Pakistan etc. Respondents AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I, Arshad Ali Ch, Advocate-on- Record, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Islamabad, do solemnly hereby affirm and declare as under:- That the deponent did serve the respondent through registered Notice intimating about the

filing of Constitutional Petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. SWORN at Islamabad this day of 11-10-2007 DEPONENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Constitutional Jurisdiction) Const. Petition No. /2009 Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani s/o Syed Hassan Shah Gillani, R/O 1-Shaukat Line, opposite Neelam Stadium, Muzaffarabad, Azad Kashmir. Petitioner Versus 1. Government of Pakistan through Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Prime Minister Secretariat, Islamabad8 2. Prime Minister of Pakistan as Chairman Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council through Secretary In charge, Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council, Secretariat, Islamabad 3. Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad through its Secretary 4. Ministry for Kashmir Affairs & Northern Areas, Islamabad through its Secretary 5. The Azad Jammu & Kashmir Council, Secretariat II, Islamabad through its Secretary 6. Government of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, the Secretariat, Muzaffarabad, through its Chief Secretary 7. Department of Law, Justice, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights Azad Jammu & Kashmir through its Secretary 8. The Honorable Mr. Justice Muhammad Reaz Akhtar Chaudhry, Chief Justice Azad Jammu & Kashmir Supreme Court, through Registrar Supreme Court Respondents NOTICE Please take notice that I have filed a titled Constitutional Petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Arshad Ali Ch Advocate-on- Record, 06-05-2009 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Constitutional Jurisdiction) Const. Petition No. /2009 Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani Petitioner versus Government of Pakistan etc.... Respondents CONCISE STATEMEN The petitioner is a law abiding citizen of Pakistan and the senior most judge of the Honorable Supreme Court Azad Jammu & Kashmir having worked as such since August 2004. The petitioner has had an unblemished record of service not only as judge of the Supreme Court but as judge of the Azad

Jammu & Kashmir High Court (1991-2001), as its Chief Justice (2001-2004) besides having held the offices of the Advocate General & Chief Election Commissioner, AJK, and the Vice Chancellor of the AJK University. He has immensely contributed to the development of law through judicial pronouncements of constitutional importance and wrote multiple articles published in the well respected journals of Pakistan besides being the author of three books on constitutional law; The Government of Pakistan has assumed the responsibilities of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir territory, called local authority within the spirit of various U.N. Security Council and UNCIP Resolutions and its administration is regulated for the time being under the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the Interim Constitution Act, which is given by the Government of Pakistan for the better Government and administration. The relevant part of the preamble of the Interim Constitution Act states that: AND WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide for the better Government and administration of Azad Jammu and Kashmir until such time as the status of Jammu and Kashmir is determined as aforesaid and for that purpose to repeal and re-enact the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act, 1970, with certain modifications; AND WHEREAS, in the discharge of its responsibilities under the UNCIP Resolution, the Government of Pakistan has approved of the proposed repeal and re-enactment of the said Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government Act, 1970, and authorized the President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir to introduce the present Bill in the Legislative Assembly of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for consideration and passage. Case Law: 1. PLJ 1999 AJK 1 2. PLD 2006 Lah. 465 3. PLD 1996 SC 324 4. Federation of Pakistan Vs. Public at Large (PLD 1988 Supreme Court 202) 5. Government of Blochistan Vs. Azizullah Memon nd others (PLD 1993 S C 341) 6. Government of NWFP V. Said Kamal Shah (PLD 1986 Supreme Court 360) NOTE; Other case law/material will be placed before the Honorable Court at the time of the hearing of the petition. CERTIFICATE: Certified that I have myself prepared this Concise Statement and found it correct. Arshad Ali Ch Advocate-on- Record BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Constitutional Jurisdiction) Const. Petition No. /2009 Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani. Petitioner Versus Government of Pakistan etc. ... Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner Muhammad Akram Sheikh, SASC With Arshad Ali Ch, AOR Counsel for the Respondents - I N D E X Sr. No. Description Dated Page 1. Concise Statement 06-05-2007 A B 2. Const. Petition 06-05-2007 01 18 3. Copy of advice to President AJ&K 20-10-2006 19 4. Format of advice 05.09.1990 20 5. Copy of Notification 21.10.2006 21 6. Summary for the Prime Minister with Non Paper 25.06.2008 22 25 7. Representations to Prime Minister of Pakistan 26 34 8. Copy of Writ Petition 35 43 9. Contempt of Court Notice 27.03.2007 44 10. Order of AJ&K Supreme Court 28.03.2007 45 47 11. Written Statement by the JKCHR 07.06.2007 48

51 9. News Cutting 52 56 10. Affidavit of facts & Services 06-05-2007 57 58 11. Notice 06-05-2007 59 Certified that the paper books has been prepared in accordance with Rules of the Court and that all documents necessary for due appreciation of the case, have been included in it. Arshad Ali Ch Advocate on Record