Former Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Tariq Mehmood Jehangiri has moved the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) to challenge his removal from office, escalating a dispute that cuts across questions of judicial jurisdiction, alleged bias and due process within the superior judiciary.

Through his counsel Barrister Salahuddin Ahmed, Jehangiri filed a petition against the IHC’s December 18 order in a quo warranto case, under which he was removed on the ground of holding an allegedly invalid LLB degree.

At the heart of the challenge lies the petitioner’s contention that the quo warranto proceedings were unlawfully sustained on disputed material originating from the University of Karachi, a material that, he argues, was never validly adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction.

The petition contended that the quo warranto case was based entirely upon the alleged record and proceedings of the University of Karachi against him.

“Such record and proceedings were disputed by the petitioner. He had never been confronted with the same and all such proceedings were conducted without notice behind his back. He had, therefore, challenged the same before the Sindh High Court. He had further pleaded that, unlike certain other universities, the University of Karachi was not conferred the legal authority to withdraw a degree that had already been awarded – especially after the passage of decades and creation of vested rights.”

The petition further asserted that the IHC lacked territorial jurisdiction to rule on the validity of proceedings initiated by a Sindh-based university.

“Needless to say, the Islamabad High Court lacked the territorial jurisdiction to determine the validity of the University’s proceedings vis a vis the Petitioner. It was only the Sindh High Court that could do so and it had, already, suspended the University’s declaration cancelling/withdrawing the Petitioner’s degree and LLB results as well as all prior proceedings. The University even assented to the same.”

“As such, the Islamabad High Court could not, in any event, have proceeded further with the quo warranto proceedings until the proceedings in the Sindh High Court were finally decided.”

The petition further alleged that the proceedings before the IHC were vitiated by bias.

“It was not merely a case of propriety or where the bench had discretion to hear the matter or not. It was a case of disqualification.”

The petitioner asserted both actual bias and the reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the bench.

“The Petitioner asserts the existence of actual bias as well as the reasonable apprehension/appearance of bias as chief justice’s transfer to the Islamabad High Court and grant of seniority to him and his consequent appointment as Chief Justice had been challenged by him in a petition.”

“He could not hear the petitioner’s case with the fairness, impartiality and detachment required under the Code of Conduct for Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.