ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court was moved on Saturday against the incumbent Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, stating that the extension in his tenure was in violation of the articles 2A, 4, 9, 14, 20 and 25 of Constitution and various provisions of law.

Inam-ul-Rahim Advocate, the petitioner, has prayed to the apex court to direct the federation to appoint the senior most general, presently General Khalid Shameem Wayne, on the principle of seniority in the interest of public.

According to Inam, General Wayne was appointed as the Chairman Joint Staff Committee, the setup without any utility, despite the fact that he is the senior most after General Kayani.

The petitioner filed the petition under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution and made federation through the defence secretary a respondent. He has served in Judge Advocate General (the legal branch of army) and Pakistan Military Academy for about 27 years on various posts and is presently placed on the reservist list of Pakistan Army.

He says Pakistan being a nuclear state cannot afford any overage and defeated chief to command the armed forces. The extension of COAS is, therefore, against the law of land and tantamount to deprivation of rights of his successors who could in turn be promoted to the position of COAS by the virtue of seniority. He states that under the Rule 262 of Army Rules and Regulations 1998, an officer holding a permanent regular commission completing an age/service limits (whichever occurs first), prescribed therein 60 years in case of a general would not be retained on the effective list under the orders of the federal government.

He questioned whether any provision of law exists under which any authority can award another extension of complete tenure to the army chief or anybody else.

“Whether is it not disgrace of entire army command and that no body in the army is competent to replace the present COAS? Whether Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani is indispensable or he has rendered any substantial services to the nation or he ever defended the motherland and his own headquarter?”

He raises another question about the exceptional treatment. “Whether as per army seniority list, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, approaching the age of 60 on 20th of April 2012, the age of superannuation, even prescribed for the civilian government employees, may be entitled to be an exception above law of the land?”

Referring to the Supreme Court ruling against granting extension, he queried why the rule was not applied to Gen Kayani.

He further questioned whether Kayani was not responsible to defend the Salala checkpost in an attack, which lasted for three hours wherein 26 precious lives of soldiers were lost. But he failed to respond and abide by the Constitution and oath taken thereunder in violation of articles 5, 9 and 14 of the Constitution.

Inam asked whether the incident of Abbottabad, operations in Fata, Wana and Swat where all the drone attacks were carried out with the connivance of Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and/or it was due to his inefficiency and is in violation of Articles 9, 14 and 5 of the Constitution.

“Whether the act of demolishing the mosques by Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, the COAS was not infringement of the right of the people to profess religion as guaranteed by Articles 2-A and 20 of the Constitution?” the petitioner says.

He stated that Pervez Musharraf and his team collaborated with foreigners to architect the NRO, adding that Gen Kayani was very much present in Dubai where it was agreed upon and approved. As per various press reports, he emerged as a guarantor of NRO. It was result of that deal Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani and President Asif Ali Zardari gave him illegal and illegitimate extension of three years tenure, so that their interest should be guarded well.