& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Writ against Justice Rouf

Petitioner's counsel concludes submission
Tlx jm—iJcntiai order to the cUcct iliat JuMice M A Rouf, while holding the office of the Chief Election Commissioner, would continue to hold the office of a iudge of the Supreme Court, was questioned in the High Court yesterday, reports UNB.
Pleading a writ petition against lustice Rouf, Barrister Amirul Islam submitted before the court that the order made by the President was violative of Article 1 IB (2) (5) of the Constitution.
He told the High Court division bench comprising lustice Habibur Rahman Khan and Justice M M Ruhul Amin that the appointment of Justice Rouf as the judge of the Appellate Division "is out of the ambit of this order."
The writ challenging the authority under which Justice Rouf is holding the office of a jtfdge in the itoptllate Divi sion was filed by convenor of the Coordination Council for Lawyers' Advocate Shamsul Huq Chowdhury on June 11.
Barrister Islam said the ) 1th Amendment to the Constitution has been wrongly placed under the Fourth Schedule because the Constitution never contemplated addition of anything to the Fourth Schedule after the enactment of the Constitution and Article 150 does not contemplate the Ilth Amend ntent.
The 11 th Amendment, Islam said, is violative of the fundamental structure of the Constitution since the legislature transgressed its limit by declaring the llth Amend ment to have been validly made, exercised, tendered and admini'tered according to
law
He said the legislature can jnly make law and it is the function of the judiciary to give a judgement as to the validity of any law passed by Parliament.
Therefore, through the 11 th Amendment, the legislature has encroached upon the exclusive domain of the judiciary and hence struck at the very root of the concept of separation id power which is inbuilt in the Constitution. Thus it must be struck down, he argued.
Summing up his argument yesterday' afternoon, he said Justice Rouf's appointment has been done in violation of the independence of the judi ciary because it has been done without consultation with the Chief Justice. This is a con vention which has been .followed since 1862 till date and which was guaranteed under the Article 95 of the 1972 Constitution.
Barrister Islam was assisted by Barrister Tania Amir, Advocate Saleem Ullah and Ad vocate Shirin Sharmin Chowdhury.
Later, Additional Attorney General Abdul Wadud Khan-daker began his submission before the court till adjournment.