Supreme Court cannot be left to one person

The Supreme Court cannot be left to one person, so a policy has to be made on the formation of the Motu Bench.
The Chief Justice does not have the power to change the batch once the hearing has started

There is a Supreme fear of dictatorship due to the one-man show. If the forum for solving political issues, the parliament becomes a political institution, the credibility will be lost: the Panama case is also mentioned in the decision.

ISLAMABAD (Mian Aqeel Afzal) Supreme Court Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel issued a detailed decision in the decision of the self-notice case related to elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Both of them stated in the detailed reasons for the controversial decision that the decision of the Supreme Court to reject the petitions on March 1 and to reject the self-notice case was given by the 4th Court, which is the responsibility of all institutions to follow. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Mandukhel declared in a detailed judgment that by rejecting the applications related to elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the process of automatic notice is also terminated. The time has come to end the one-man show and exercise of power in the office of the Chief Justice. The one-man show is not only an outdated system but also evil. Thus, this one-man show risks authoritarian rule, despite the fact that opinion-based decision-making tipped the balance of power, ironically giving the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court broad powers to form the bench. Yes, the Supreme Court talks about regulating the powers of national institutions but does not look into its own neck. Both the judges stated that the Supreme Court cannot be left to the decisions of only one person. The time has come to regulate the jurisdiction of (3)184, suo motu 4 Judges rejected. The Order of Court in Election Spontaneous Notice case is a 3-4 ratio decision, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah declared that the Chief Justice’s one-man power show authority will have to be reconsidered, Spontaneous Notice, Preshall Page, Constitutional The bench formation policy on matters has to be made by the full court, the authority of the Chief Justice must be regulated, the power of the Supreme Court depends on public trust. The Judiciary should be careful in using the power of suo motu case, the aggrieved party in a suo motu case loses the right to appeal, we also have reservations about the procedure for taking suo motu notice, in a case of transfer of a policeman. Two components recommended taking notes on their own. Among those recommending the suo motu notice was Hajj, the purported audio leaker. The forum for solving the style is parliament or political debate, the Supreme Court used the notice itself in the cases of the Chief Minister of Punjab and the interpretation of Article 163A. escalates, the one-man show must reconsider its options. The dissenting note further states that it is believed that the decision to quash the notice by itself has become a judicial order by a majority of 3-4.