ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday de-notified Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri after ruling that he did not possess a valid law degree at the time of his appointment.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Muhammad Azam Khan declared Justice Jahangiri’s elevation to the high court “illegal,” holding that the possession of a valid L.L.B degree is a mandatory constitutional requirement under Article 175-A. The bench ordered him to immediately vacate office and directed the Ministry of Law and Justice to take steps for his formal removal from the judiciary.
The court noted that despite being given “ample opportunities,” Justice Jahangiri failed to submit a reply or produce valid educational credentials, compelling the bench to decide the matter on the basis of the available record. All miscellaneous and connected petitions were disposed of, with detailed reasons to be issued later. Justice Jahangiri left the court premises around half an hour before the verdict was announced.
The controversy surrounding his academic credentials surfaced last year after a letter, purportedly issued by the University of Karachi’s controller of examinations, circulated on social media. Subsequently, a complaint was filed with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) in July, seeking an inquiry into the alleged fake degree.
Advocate Mian Dawood, who challenged Justice Jahangiri’s appointment, said the judge’s past decisions would remain unaffected and that any benefits or privileges already received would also stand. However, he stressed that it was the government’s responsibility to initiate further proceedings, warning that failure to do so would be “regrettable.”
The IHC order declared that Justice Jahangiri did not possess a valid LL.B degree at the time of his appointment or confirmation, rendering his elevation “without lawful authority.” The court ordered his immediate de-notification and directed the law ministry to act accordingly while disposing of all pending applications and objections.
Dawood also called for accountability at the University of Karachi, alleging that fake mark sheets for L.L.B Part One and Two had been prepared, and urged action against any individuals or institutions that facilitated or protected the judge.
Justice Jahangiri has challenged the IHC decision, arguing that the order was passed without affording him the right to be heard, in violation of Article 10A of the Constitution. In his petition, he maintained that the issue involved disputed questions of fact that could not be adjudicated in quo warranto proceedings without recording evidence, which he argued falls outside the jurisdiction of a high court.
He further contended that the IHC relied on a University of Karachi report without allowing him to contest its validity, despite related proceedings being pending before the Sindh High Court, where the university’s actions have been suspended. Justice Jahangiri denied the allegations, stating that his academic credentials have remained on record throughout his legal and judicial career.
Through a petition filed by Advocate Uzair Bhandari, Justice Jahangiri sought leave to appeal, conversion of the petition into an appeal, setting aside of the December 9 order, and dismissal of the writ petition on grounds of non-maintainability.
The case has followed a prolonged legal course. In September, the IHC had initially restrained Justice Jahangiri from performing judicial functions, an order later set aside by the Supreme Court, which ruled that a high court cannot bar a sitting judge from functioning while hearing a quo warranto petition. The apex court directed the IHC to decide the matter in accordance with law.
Justice Jahangiri was also among six IHC judges who last year wrote to the SJC alleging interference in judicial affairs by intelligence agencies, triggering a wider debate on judicial independence.
