ISLAMABAD - Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on Wednesday filed review petition under Article 188 of Consti­tution against the apex court verdict on Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s petition against the Presidential Reference.

SCBA President Syed Qalb-e-Has­san filed the petition and questioned under what provision of Income Tax Ordinance (ITO) 2001 or any other law timeline/deadline has been giv­en to the Income Tax authorities re­garding the proceedings against wife and children of Justice Qazi Faez.

Justice Qazi Faez had challenged the Presidential Reference under Article 184(3) of Constitution. Besides the apex court judge, Pakistan Bar Coun­cil, Supreme Court Bar Association, Bar Councils & Association of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan and Abid Has­san Minto, and I A Rehman had also challenged the Presidential Reference.

A 10-member bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial passed the short order on June 19. The court quashed the reference and abated the proceedings before the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

The SCBA stated in the review petition that they are fully satis­fied with para 1 of the short order but they have serious reservations about the contents of para 3 to 11 of the order, therefore sought review by way of deletion of these paras.

It questioned that under what pro­vision of law and the constitution the matter relating the assets and prop­erties of the spouse and children of the apex court judge has been re­ferred to the Federal Board of Rev­enue by the Supreme Court under short order dated 19-06-2020 when they were neither a party to the pro­ceedings before the Supreme Judi­cial Council nor they were party be­fore the Court in proceeding under Article 184(3) of Constitution?

It added that whether the apex court without assigning any reasons could override the provisions of Sec­tion 112 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and issue direction in respect of the matter which pertained to years beyond the period of limitation giv­en therein and deny due process and protection of law to the spouse and the children of Justice Qazi Faez?

The petition said that what juris­diction does the Supreme Judicial Council have in regard to the assets and properties of spouse and chil­dren of a judge?

The SCBA submitted that SJC be­came functus officio for the purpose of this case after quashing of refer­ence against Justice Qazi Faez. It is beyond the jurisdiction of SJC to take notice of any future report against Justice Faez when admittedly assets and properties of the said judge are no more in question and there was no misconduct alleged by anybody against the said judge.

It contended that the impugned order is unconstitutional and is li­able to be review in the interest of justice. The SCBA said the apex court has referred the matter in relation to properties of the spouse and chil­dren of Justice Faez to FBR without assigning any reasons.

It submitted that under Section 122 of ITO, 2001 certain substantive and procedural safeguards have been provided for the protection of the tax-payers including a period of lim­itation for amending an assessment.

The Bar Association said that there are no possible grounds for the directions to the FBR therefore 19th June order being without juris­diction is liable to be reviewed in the interest of justice.

It said that from the very provi­sions of Article 209 of Constitution it is clear that SJC is not a continu­ing body and is constituted for every individual case that is brought be­fore it. It is equally incomprehen­sible how could an unconstituted SJC or its chairman entertain a re­port. This constitutional aspect has escaped the notice of the 10-judge bench order.

The petition argued that the SJC has no jurisdiction to probe or in­quire into the assets and properties of the spouse and children of a judge because its jurisdiction is limited to the extent of physical or mental in­capacity of a judge or a case of mis­conduct against a judge. Spouse and children of a judge do not fall with­in the scope and ambit of exercise of jurisdiction.