Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan
Mr.Justice Gulzar Ahmed
Honourable Chief Justice
Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh
Honourable Chairman I.T. Committe
Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Latest Case Law (Approved For Reporting)
1 . Cr.Bail 184/2021 Bhano Khan Hattar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152250 ]Post Arrest BailRead more
2 . Cr.Bail 204/2021 Arz Muhammad Khosa V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at LarkanaPost Arrest BailRead more
3 . Cr.Bail 191/2021 Mujeeb Rehman @ Mujahid V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152251 ]Post Arrest BailRead more
4 . Cr.Bail 252/2021 Ahmed Ali @ Ali Bhutto and another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152248 ]Post Arrest BailRead more
5 . Cr.Bail 216/2021 Asghar Gahejo V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152249 ]Post Arrest BailRead more
6 . Cr.Rev 29/2021 MS.RUBINA MIR D/O LATE MIR MUHAMMAD V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152200 ]
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
7 . Suit 1608/2020 Seamax Marine Services V/S The Ministry of Maritime Affairs & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152142 ]Rule 48 of Public Procurement Rules, 2004.Read more
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION
8 . H.C.A 108/2021 Professor Dr. Lubna Ansari Baig V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152148 ]
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
9 . Criminal Appeal 45/2020 Allahdad Waswano V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152247 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Upto 7 Years)Read more
10 . Criminal Appeal 273/2019 MUHAMMAD USMAN S/O MUHAMMAD ASLAM V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152128 ]
Matter:LIFE IMPRISONMENT
11 . Const. P. 1307/2020 Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-HYD - 152088 ]We have examined the layout plan, drawings and Google map of the project available on record, wherein the actual path of the project and the bigger curve proposed by the University have been distinctly shown. It is clear from the above that if the impugned alignment is altered by including the bigger curve proposed by the University, the overall length of the project will be increased by several kilometers, and a portion of the said proposed bigger curve will pass through the oil and gas fields of OGDC. In such an event, the cost of the project and the time required for its completion will be increased substantially, and the said oil and gas fields will be exposed to the public / commuters and heavy construction machinery which may result into a disaster. Therefore, in addition to the legal position discussed above, prima facie, the proposal made by the University does not appear to be practical and safe for the commuters, public at large and the people working at the said oil and gas fields. In view of the object, purpose and urgent need of the project, it shall be in the public interest that the same is completed expeditiously. As a result of the above discussion, C.P. No.1307/2020 and all the applications pending therein are dismissed ; and C.P. No.05/2021 is disposed of by directing the Government and the acquiring agency to complete the project and the land acquisition proceedings in respect thereof expeditiously and strictly in terms of the Act. There will be no order as to costs in any of the subject petitions.Read more
12 . Suit 2581/2014 Mohsin Ahmad. V/S Nasreen Irfan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152047 ]Stipulation in mortgage deed that mortgagee would become owner or vendee of the property if mortgage money is not paid, is a clog on the right/equity of redemption, repugnant to law and void.Read more
Matter:ADMINISTRATION
13 . Suit 717/2010 AGAH ASAD ABBAS V/S MST.NASEEM IRFAN Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152048 ]Limitation for an application for restoration of a suit dismissed for non-prosecution, is governed by Article 163 of the Limitation Act, not by Article 181.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
14 . Criminal Miscelleneous 365/2014 BILQEES D/O MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE & OTHERS V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:QUASHMENT
15 . Const. P. 4371/2020 Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151987 ]Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-4371 of 2020 filed by Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin against Government of Sindh (vehicle number plats petition). The petition has been dismissed.Read more
Matter:TENDER
16 . Const. P. 3673/2021 Arshad Ali Khan V/S FBR and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152007 ]Maintainability of Petition against a Show Cause Notice; held not maintainable.Read more
Matter:CUSTOM MATTER
17 . Const. P. 3468/2021 M/s Kiran Food Products V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152074 ]Import of betel nuts under Serial No.5 of Part-I and Serial No.155 of Part-III of Appendix B of Import Policy Order, 2020; has to be regulated by Plant Protection Department under the Quarantine Act and the Rules framed thereunder and not by the Customs department.Read more
Matter:CUSTOM MATTER
18 . Const. P. 3268/2021 Rehan Arif V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152028 ]Import of vehicle under personal baggage and payment of duty and taxes under Para 6 of Appendix E of the Import Policy order 2020Read more
Matter:CUSTOM MATTER
19 . Suit -819/2021 SYED GHULAM SARWAR SHAH V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152009 ]As a result of the above discussion, it is hereby held that the instant Suit is barred by limitation, and also under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, and Order VI Rule 4 CPC, and is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Accordingly, the Suit is liable to be dismissed with costs. Foregoing are the reasons of the short order announced by me on 08.04.2021 whereby this Suit and the listed applications were dismissed with costs of Rs.100,000.00 (Rupees one hundred thousand only). The amount of costs shall be deposited by the plaintiff with the Nazir of this Court within thirty (30) days, which amount shall be transferred / deposited forthwith by the Nazir in the bank account of Edhi Foundation.Read more
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION
20 . Suit 2576/2016 Abdul Karim Rathor & others V/S Muhammad Naeem & others Sindh High Court, KarachiWhen matter can be addressed by an injunction, no need to appoint Receiver.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
21 . Suit 1234/2017 Muhammad Naeed. V/S Abdul Karim Rathor & Others. Sindh High Court, KarachiWhen matter can be addressed by an injunction, no need to appoint Receiver.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
22 . Suit 2345/2016 FAREED YOUNUS & OTHERS V/S MUHAMMAD NAEEM & OTHERS Sindh High Court, KarachiWhen matter can be addressed by an injunction, no need to appoint Receiver.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
23 . Spl.Cr.Bail 29/2021 DAWOOD-UR-REHMAN S/O HAFEEZ-UR-REHMAN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, KarachiBail granted in alleged offence under Section 156 of the Customs Act read with CNS Act, 1997.Read more
Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST
24 . Cr.Bail 919/2021 TALHA S/O LIAQUAT ALI PARDAR V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, KarachiBail in ATA Case.Read more
Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST
25 . Const. P. 429/2021 Mst. Hira Imam Thr. Nawabzada Kamran Hussain Mugha V/S Hasan Khurshid Hashmi and another Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:FAMILY MATTER
26 . Criminal Appeal 21/2020 Sanaullah & Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151727 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Life)Read more
27 . Criminal Appeal 7/2021 Ali Nawaz Lolai V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151729 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Upto 7 Years)Read more
28 . Criminal Appeal 3/2019 Dost Muhammad Thebo & Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151728 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Life)Read more
29 . Cr.J.A 61/2016 Saeedo @ Saindad V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151732 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Life)Read more
30 . Criminal Appeal 88/2018 Hafeez Machi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151731 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Life)Read more
31 . Suit 17/2021 MUHAMMAD JAMIL BABAR V/S SARA JALIL & OTHERS Sindh High Court, KarachiIn view of the above discussion, it is hereby held that the instant Suit is maintainable and the same should be decided on merits. Resultantly, CMA No.6832/2021, filed by defendant No.1 for dismissal of the Suit, is dismissed with no order as to costs ; and, CMA No.7798/2021, filed by the plaintiff seeking permission to deposit the original documents of his vehicle in lieu of the amount ordered by this Court, having become infructuous in view of the deposit already made by him, is dismissed as such.Read more
Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
32 . Const. P. 3520/2021 Zahid Hussain Shah Naqvi V/S Addl I.G Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151712 ]official accommodationRead more
Matter:ACCOMODATION
33 . Const. P. 3309/2011 M/S Ibrahim Fibres Ltd V/S Prov. of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151733 ]Infrastructure fee / cess levied vide Sindh Finance Act, 2017 applicable retrospectively w.e.f. 01.07.1994 is intra vires; all petitions stand dismissed to that effect; however, Insofar as the first four versions of law introduced through Sindh Finance Act, 1994, amended through Sindh Finance Act, 1996, the Sindh Finance (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, and the Sindh Finance (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2001 are concerned, their applicability on the petitioners who had litigated earlier and were Appellants in Sanofi Aventis(PLD 2009 Karachi 65), has attained finality and is a past and closed transaction, notwithstanding promulgation of its fifth version vide Sindh Finance (Amendment) Ordinance, 2006, further amended by The Sindh Finance (Amendment) Act, 2007 (Sindh Act No: II of 2007, and The Sindh Finance (Amendment) Act, 2009 (Sindh Act No: III of 2009);Read more
Matter:INFRASTRUCTURE CESS
34 . Const. P. 265/2020 Muhammad Salman Khan Baloch (Adv) V/S Syed Mustafa Kamal & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151711 ]Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-265 of 2020 (writ of quo warranto) filed by Mohammad Salman Khan Baloch against Syed Mustafa Kamal, Ex City Nazim (Mayor) of Karachi for his disqualification. The petition has been dismissed.Read more
Matter:ELECTION MATTER
35 . Suit 789/2018 Mst. Nadia Shakeel & another V/S Shagufta Baqar & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151775 ]There is no concept of amendment in the disposed of memo of petition for Letter of Administration in respect of ONE identified deceased on subsequent death of another person who was legal heir of the deceased whose petition has been disposed of prior to the death of the other personRead more
Matter:DECLARATION
36 . Const. P. 2201/2017 Muhammad Asif Ansari and Ors V/S Pakistan Televison Corp. and ORs Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151747 ]the foremost questions involved in the present proceedings are whether the re-designation / induction of the private respondents as Producer Programs (G-5) was/is suffering from inherent disqualification under the PTVC rules, and whether the private respondents are holders of the public office, therefore, fall within the purview of sub-clause 1(b) (ii) of Article 199 of the Constitution and this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this petition?Read more
Matter:QUO WARRANTO
37 . Const. P. 1497/2020 Nasir Kamal V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151690 ]PNSC is hereby directed to pay all the post-retirement benefits to the petitioner strictly in accordance with law without fail within fifteen (15) days and to submit compliance report to this Court through MIT-II within seven (07) days thereafter. For future as well as for cases pending for calculation and/or payment of post-retirement benefits, PNSC is further directed to ensure compliance of the directions given by the Hon???ble Supreme Court in Haji Muhammad Ismail Advocate (supra) and Province of Punjab, through Conservator of Forest, Faisalabad (supra) in letter and spirit The petition is allowed in the above terms with costs.Read more
Matter:RETIREMENT BENEFIT
38 . Const. P. 3184/2021 Tahira Haneef V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151713 ]In the light of the above discussion, in our view, a deputationist could not be treated as an aggrieved person, because she has no vested right to remain on a post as deputationist forever or for a stipulated period and can be repatriated at any time to her parent department more particularly in the light of aforesaid decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court. Reference is also made to the case of Dr. Shafi-ur-Rehman Afridi V/s CDA, Islamabad through Chairman and others (2010 SCMR 378). Even otherwise she cannot continue to serve on deputation in Sindh Government after her removal from service by the parent department, as discussed supra.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
39 . Const. P. 1736/2013 Akhlaque Hussain Memon and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151695 ]whether the post of Additional/Assistant Advocate General could be filled amongst District Attorneys as per the Sindh Law Officers (Conditions of Service Rules), 1940 as amended up to date; and, whether between the notification dated 10.5.2016 bearing S.REG:1(22)2015/117 and notification dated 9.4.2018 bearing S.REG.4(07)/2018 which one is to prevail; and, whether the service structure for Deputy District Attorney and District Attorney in Solicitor Department, Government of Sindh needs to be streamlined ?Read more
Matter:SERVICE
40 . Const. P. 3502/2021 Syed Babar Hashmi V/S Govt. of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151693 ]We do not agree with the statement of the learned counsel for the Petitioner on the aforesaid assertions for the simple reason that compulsory retirement from service is a major penalty under service jurisprudence and falls within the ambit of expression terms and condition of service of the civil servant, therefore, the jurisdiction of all other courts is barred by the provision of Sindh Service Tribunals Act, 1973 read with Article 212(2) of the Constitution. On the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified with the decision rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme court in the case of Ali Azhar Khan Baloch vs. Province of Sindh [2015 SCMR 456]Read more
Matter:SERVICE
41 . M.A. 44/2021 Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Ltd V/S The Court of District Judge, Khi (East) & another Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Succession Act, Carriage By Air Act, 2012 (Rule 6 of 6th Schedule)
[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151730 ]Precisely the gist of law and the succession application provides that the litigation commenced for issuance of a certificate in terms of Rule 1, 2 and 6 of Sixth Schedule of the ibid Act 2012. It enabled one of the legal heirs of the deceased to pursue the proceedings on behalf of all legal heirs who sustained damages to claim compensation from the airline. -Respondent No.2 approached District Judge/ respondent No.1 for issuance of requisite succession certificate. The District Judge/ Respondent No.1 however in terms of order impugned in these proceedings treated such compensation as an asset left by the deceased/victim and by considering it as part of succession application and has taken action in terms of the impugned order, which action is being challenged by the appellant/PIA in these proceedings. I disapprove the observation of the District Judge to the extent whereby recovery process was initiated.Read more
Matter:SUCESSION MATTERS
42 . M.A. 3/2021 M/s. Jiangsu Dajin Heavy Industry Co. Limited V/S Port Qasim Authority (PQA) and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: General Clauses Act, 1897 (Section 24A), PPRA Rules, 2004 (Rule 36), PPRA Rules, 2004 ( Rule 25, 29, 30 and 31)
[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151696 ]- Indeed, it appears that it was more than a month after opening of the bid that the appellant made an attempt to rectify its material inability by furnishing a separate/counter bank guarantee from Bank AlHabib for both the tenders. This deficiency could not have been resurrected as by then the ship sailed. These belated attempts would have amounted to a modification of the tender documents, which is not permissible under Rule 31 of Rules 2004. Eventually only those whose technical bids were found to be in consonance with the terms of the invitation, were liable to be considered for further steps and were considered accordingly. -Petitioner being aware of the said tender conditions participated and having participated in the tender cannot challenge or dislike prerequisites meant for technical qualification. He could only expect judicious treatment within the playing rules however, it was too late for appellant when it realized that playing conditions were not palatable to it. The situation faced by appellant based on the aforesaid facts is not res integra as a number of judgments are in the filed covering the issue as settled law. - Even if I have to measure bidding terms on the touchstone of malice and mala fide, I would come out with understanding that these terms are for every one and not to exclude anyone. These are commercial transactions and decisions in this regard should base on strict compliance of terms of tenders whereas equity and fair play based on financial offer is not primary concern. Even if someone intends to impress by showing better financial offer, he has to qualify first on technical grounds. It is the overall impact till completion of job that needs serious consideration by procuring agency. Whether a bidder has the ability to deliver as per terms of tenders and having capacity to ensure project???s completion should be the primary concern of procuring agency. There is thus nothing which could lead to conclude that the process ended up in a decision of rejecting technical bid of appellant was flawed. - Any term within frame of law is also not open for a judicial review even under the hierarchy of procurement laws as Rule 25 enables the procuring agency to require bid security not exceeding five per cent of the bid price to be furnished by every bidder and procuring agency may save its effectiveness for a period as they required in terms of Rule 26.Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
43 . Suit 271/2021 Muhammad Asim V/S The Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, KarachiAudit notice issued by the Commissioner beyond jurisdiction, could not be remedied by transferring the same to the Commissioner having jurisdiction.Read more
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION
44 . Suit 1784/2010 SHARAFAT ALI V/S MST. SHAHJAHAN BEGUM & ANOTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151817 ]The Suit was liable to be dismissed in any event in view of the above-cited law laid down by the Hon???ble Supreme Court due to the plaintiff???s admitted failure in depositing the balance sale consideration in Court despite this Court???s order. Thus, the order dated 21.05.2018 of the dismissal of the Suit on both the grounds was fully justified, and the same is not liable to be recalled. Foregoing are the reasons of the short order announced by me on 01.06.2021 whereby the listed application was dismissed with no order as to costs.Read more
Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
45 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 150/2015 Collector of Customs V/S The Customs Appellate Tribunal Bench-III & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151667 ]Customs:- Amnesty Scheme once granted; no further demand of 1% flood Relief Surcharge can be raised.Read more
Matter:CUSTOM MATTER
46 . Const. P. 169/2020 Fajjar Din V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151659 ]This Constitutional Petition has been filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari/ mandamus to call for the records relating to the Compulsory Retirement Order dated 01.11.2012 and Appellate Order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the respondent-Airport Security Force (hereinafter referred to as `ASF'), and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate services of the petitioner as an Inspector (ASF).Read more
Matter:SERVICE
47 . Const. P. 269/2020 Muhammad Arif Memon V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151668 ]Through this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondents be directed to issue notification in respect of his retirement and to pay his post-retirement benefits and outstanding salary.Read more
Matter:PENSIONARY BENEFITS
48 . Const. P. 4035/2019 Bashir Ahmed Kalwar V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151131 ]Declare the supersession of the petitioner made by the Respondent No.02 / CSB and the competent authority through impugned order dated 06.06.2018 as illegal--Direct the respondents to consider the case of promotion of petitioner in BPS-20, in terms of original reference of December, 2016--when a civil/public servant is recommended for supersession by the Central Selection Board (CSB) and the recommendation of the CSB is approved by the competent authority, what is its effect, and whether supersession is punishment?Read more
Matter:SERVICE
49 . Suit 2415/2016 Saleem Butt V/S Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151651 ]Given the mechanism in-built in section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance, which includes the providing of reasons in writing to the taxpayer, the power conferred on the Commissioner to call for record under section 177(1) of the Ordinance, does not by itself offend Article 25 of the Constitution. The question then, whether such power has been used unlawfully, is different, and one that may vary with the circumstances of each case. While making such challenge, the Plaintiff had also to demonstrate infringement of a Fundamental Right. The invoking of section 177(1) does not militate against the concept of deemed assessment under section 122 of the Ordinance. Malafides had to be pleaded with particulars.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
50 . Suit 1872/2016 Saleem Butt.. V/S Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151652 ]Challenge to the vires of section 230(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 on the ground of delegation of excessive legislative power ??? not successful. While making such challenge, the Plaintiff had also to demonstrate infringement of a Fundamental Right. SRO 115(I)/2015 re the conferring of powers and functions on the DG I&I, was within the jurisdiction of the FBR. Effect of striking-down of same SRO by another High Court ??? discussed. The invoking of section 176 does not militate against the concept of deemed assessment under section 122 of the Ordinance. Malafides had to be pleaded with particulars.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
51 . Const. P. 3310/2018 Muhammad Asad ul Rehman V/S Govt. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151229 ]the petitioners are seeking regularization of their services against the quota reserved for deceased civil servants as provided under the Prime Minister???s Assistance Package for the Families of Government Employees, on the premise that their parents were serving in the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) on different posts, who passed away during their service.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
52 . Const. P. 3803/2020 Suhaila Hussain V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151615 ]whether the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of her previous service rendered with effect from 1971 till her reinstatement/re-employment in the year 1990 or not?Read more
Matter:PENSION
53 . Const. P. 1335/2019 Mansoor Ahmed and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachiprayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)Read more
Matter:DIRECTION
54 . Const. P. 4039/2018 Mansoor Ahmed and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachiprayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)Read more
Matter:PENSION
55 . Const. P. 645/2019 Muhammad Abbas Khan and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachiprayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)Read more
Matter:PENSION
56 . Const. P. 1116/2017 Paul Francis V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachiprayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)Read more
Matter:PENSION
57 . Const. P. 6244/2019 Azizullah V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151616 ]Whether the Petitioner is qualified for the post of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 in Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh? ii) Whether the post of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 in Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh is to be filled by 80% by initial appointment through Sindh Public Service Commission (except contract employees) and 20% by promotion amongst the various categories of teachers having 7 years??? service in BPS-16?Read more
Matter:SERVICE
58 . Const. P. 2068/2016 Gulistan Textiles Mills Limited V/S VIIIth ADJ Karachi South & Another Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 8 (Fair Rent))
- Similarly, a presumptive view in respect of overall inflation and rate of taxes cannot be applied. The maintenance claimed to have been made/done by the landlord/respondent and in support thereof they have filed some accounts and debit vouchers but it pertains to a period w.e.f. March 2007onward. How these debit vouchers and maintenance bills are being applied to entire building and on what calculation and basis its ratio in terms of facilities provided to the premises is being applied, is inconceivable on the strength of the evidence available on record. Floor-wise true calculation is not provided. The presumptive analysis thus is beyond the domain and jurisdiction of the Rent Controller. The statistics in terms of inflation and maintenance charges should have been provided in statement recorded on oath and only then it could have been taken into consideration by the appellate Court. Filing plethora of documents disclosing them as debit vouchers in respect of maintaining the entire building is inconceivable. Statistics showing percentage of taxation over the building in question as well as maintenance as to be applied to entire building and has to be established statistically and not generally. Such data was not provided to Rent Controller. Taxation and maintenance are differently applied on ground floor and upper floors. - Similarly in presence of lease deeds of the same building between same landlord and tenant or between same landlord and other tenants, the reliance/applicability of rent or fair rent of other buildings in the adjoining locality should not have been applied as a priority, wherein respect of which direct evidence is available. When a building is operated by lifts there is not a serious degree of difference between second and third floor of the same building where premises are situated. - Though the Rent Controller while determining fair rent of the premises in question has taken a very conservative view by fixing fair rent at Rs.10/-per sq. foot, yet I am of the view that fair rent fixed by the appellate Court is on higher side. The Rent Controller and appellate Court were required to provide a cumulative effect of all those factors available under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 subject to availability of evidence though the quantum of inflation and the enhancement of taxation has not been statistically provided in terms of applicability of such claim/charges per sq. foot yet the other factors may contribute for the determination of fair rent. - The rise in cost of construction has also not been demonstrated statistically. It is only presumptive analysis that cost of construction rises with the passage of time, however, the witness is required to provide data of such rise in cost of construction through his affidavit or any expert witness. It is a difficult assignment but the requirement of law. This burden could be relieved had appropriate lease deeds of same building or of adjoining building having similar facilities could be cited in evidence. - Section 8(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 enables the Rent Controller to revise such fair rent on account of changes/ additions brought or improving the premises in question which is not the case here. Similarly, there cannot be an automatic enhancement at the rate of 10% per annum on the fair rent in terms of Section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. It provides a maximum cap of 10% per annum on the existing fair rent and not an automatic enhancement to its maximum. Such enhancement at any particular rate, which in any case should not be 10% per annum, is dependent on certain factors which were not decided in the application under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. Besides, there was no prayer for such enhancement under section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
59 . Const. P. 891/2019 M/s United Business Machines thr Muhammad Aslam V/S Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah & Others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 15 )
-Section 15(2)(vii) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979requires demonstration of elements such as (i) honesty of purpose and (ii) reasonableness. From the statement of landlord/owner for the purpose of eviction of a tenant on the ground of personal bona fide need only an honest intention is to be deduced and there is no other formula to adjudge good and bad faith, for the purpose of eviction on the aforesaid count. If the Court on the scrutiny of the evidence comes to the conclusion that it was an honest intention then it would be immaterial whether he remained successful in achieving the object or not that is whether his son or daughter would join him in the business after completing their education. This requirement would be immaterial in the sense that the intention of the father in evicting the tenant was an honest one.Good faith is an abstract term not capable of any rigid definition and ordinary dictionary meaning describes it as "honesty of intention". -The primary requirement and condition precedent for invoking provision of Section 15(2)(vii) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 claiming relief on the ground of personal bonafide need of landlord in good faith is that the landlord should be honest in his approach and sincerity of his purpose should be manifested by irreversible evidence and surrounding circumstances. - Sufficiency of accommodation either for a commercial/industrial activity or for residential purpose is to be adjudged best by the landlord himself and it may vary not only on case to case basis but also on the basis of nature of business that one intends to establish an honest idea about future growth of the business and its prospects. Someone may have an idea of establishing humongous business set up and he may or may not be successful in achieving his object and plan but what is 9important, as a test, is the honesty of intention and there is nothing on record in the shape of cross-examination of the landlord/owner to demonstrate that it was not an honest and genuine intention for extending and enhancing business for himself and for his family members.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
60 . Const. P. 2623/2021 Nabeel Rashid V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, KarachiReasons assigned to the short order dated 23.4.2021 passed in C.P.Nos.D-2526 & 2623 of 2021 by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito with regard to the prayer for awarding School Assessed Grades rather than holding physical exams for A and AS levels and O level.Read more
Matter:EXAMINATION
61 . Const. P. 2526/2021 Shumaila Salman Shah & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakisan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151513 ]Reasons assigned to the short order dated 23.4.2021 passed in C.P.Nos.D-2526 & 2623 of 2021 by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito with regard to the prayer for awarding School Assessed Grades rather than holding physical exams for A and AS levels and O level.Read more
Matter:EXAMINATION
62 . Suit 778/2021 FAUJI OIL TERMINAL & DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED V/S PORT QASIM AUTHORITY & ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151809 ]Injunction application dismissedRead more
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION
63 . II.A. 2/2018 Muhammad Umar & another V/S Sikandar Ali & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151427 ]Against Order of Trial CourtRead more
64 . Const. P. 1355/2020 Syed Yasir Shabbir and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
65 . Const. P. 5027/2020 Mushk Mona Ayaz V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
66 . Const. P. 1253/2020 Sadam Hussain & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
67 . Const. P. 645/2020 Imran & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
68 . Const. P. 4577/2020 Syed Muhammasd Younus and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
69 . Const. P. 5073/2020 Sartaj Ahmed & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
70 . Const. P. 4361/2020 Syed Samar Abbas V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
71 . Const. P. 5273/2020 Asia Kausar Ali V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
72 . Const. P. 5999/2020 Muhammad Arif and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
73 . Const. P. 4015/2020 Asif Soomro V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
74 . Const. P. 1604/2021 Qayyum and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
75 . Const. P. 317/2020 Shoukatullah V/S The State through Chairman NAB & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST
76 . Const. P. 3429/2020 Allah Warayo and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
77 . Const. P. 1892/2021 Muhammad Akhtar & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
78 . Const. P. 3428/2020 Hakim Ali Khokhar and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
79 . Const. P. 6676/2018 Attaullah Sirohi & Ors V/S G.M Human Resources SSGC & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:APPOINTMENT
80 . Const. P. 1923/2020 Rao Muhammad kamran & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
81 . Const. P. 6526/2020 Aftab Mahmood and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
82 . Const. P. 6182/2020 Ahsan Nisar Siddiqui V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
83 . Const. P. 5420/2020 Wahid Bux Bhutto and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
84 . Const. P. 875/2020 Muhammad Arif and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi........... We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
85 . Const. P. 1366/2021 Naeem Faisal Saleem & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
86 . Const. P. 1863/2020 Muhammad Bashir & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
87 . Const. P. 5332/2018 Fahad Arshad & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
88 . Const. P. 1087/2020 Muhammad Qaiser Alam and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
89 . Const. P. 6047/2018 Asif Mehmood & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
90 . Const. P. 1441/2020 Rashid Azeem & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.Read more
Matter:REGULARIZATION
91 . Const. P. 4662/2017 M/s Quality Steel Re-Rolling V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151323 ]SRO 583(I)/2017 struck down.Read more
Matter:SALES TAX
92 . Const. P. 4609/2019 Asadullah & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151335 ]RegularizationRead more
Matter:SERVICE
93 . Suit 1710/2018 Mrs. Tahera Iqbal Kazi & another V/S Mrs. Naseem Abid Khan & others Sindh High Court, KarachiTime of essence of contract. Judgment on admission.Read more
Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
94 . Spl. Cr. A. 7/2019 MUHAMMAD NADEEM SULEMAN KHEL S/O QALANDAR KHAN V/S THE STATE TH COLLECTOR OF CUSTOM KHI Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT
95 . Spl. Cr. A. 2/2019 ASMATULLAH S/O JANAN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS
96 . Spl. Cr. A. 6/2019 MUHAMMAD QASIM QAZI S/O NASEEMUDDIN QAZI V/S THE STATE THROUGH COLLECTOR OF CUSTOM Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT
97 . Spl. Cr. A. 4/2019 MUHAMMAD ASIF HUSSAIN S/O AKRAM KAZI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
98 . Spl. Cr. A. 1/2019 ASIM KHAN S/O ABDUL RAUF KHAN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
99 . Const. P. 4485/2020 Ashfaq Ahmed Memon V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151288 ]the major penalty of ???removal from service???--we are clear in mind that pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, the final decision against the Petitioners has yet to be taken by the respondents afresh, and the petitioners will have an opportunity of hearing before impugned final action, if any, is taken against them by the Competent Authority of respondent-Pakistan Railways Karachi.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
100 . Const. P. 3985/2020 Aurangzaib V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151287 ]the major penalty of ???removal from service???--we are clear in mind that pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, the final decision against the Petitioners has yet to be taken by the respondents afresh, and the petitioners will have an opportunity of hearing before impugned final action, if any, is taken against them by the Competent Authority of respondent-Pakistan Railways Karachi.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
101 . Suit 3/2019 Amsons Textile Mills (Pvt) Limited V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151267 ]res judicata in suit after decision in constitution petition.Read more
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION
102 . Const. P. 971/2020 Habib Bank Ltd. V/S Mst. Neelofar Awan and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 18), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 16)
In view of above I am of the view that tentative rent order should have been complied and for the period of March and April, the tenant/petitioner could have asked for adjustment of half of the rent but this was only possible after compliance and not after defiance. The rent of May/June 2020 was alsonot deposited in time. I do not find any portion of the order to be unlawful and hence the principle that since some portion of the order is not lawful, entire order is to be set aside, is not applicable here.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
103 . Const. P. 391/2018 Fayyaz Khan and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151268 ]that their contingent/contractual/ work-charge appointments/services be regularized in respondent- Directorate of Training and Research (Customs, Excise & Sales Tax) Karachi without discrimination, with a further assertion, that they have already served in respondent- Directorate for a considerable period; and, they have the legitimate expectation for appointment on regular basis.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
104 . Const. P. 887/2018 Hassan Zada & Ors V/S FOP & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151269 ]that their contingent/contractual/ work-charge appointments/services be regularized in respondent- Directorate of Training and Research (Customs, Excise & Sales Tax) Karachi without discrimination, with a further assertion, that they have already served in respondent- Directorate for a considerable period; and, they have the legitimate expectation for appointment on regular basis.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
105 . Const. P. 8756/2018 Jawed Qureshi V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151289 ]the petitioner has assailed the vires of the office order No.42/2018 issued by respondent-Employees Old-age Benefits Institution (`EOBI`), whereby he was declared as ???Dead wood???, consequently, he was forcibly sent on Early Retirement from the service of EOBI on the ground that his further retention in service would be of no benefit for the institution.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
106 . Const. P. 4970/2017 Sapphire Textile Mills Ltd V/S Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151155 ]Section 5A ITO 2001 struck down.Read more
Matter:INCOME TAX
107 . Const. P. 2844/2021 Muneer Ahmed & Ors V/S Health Department Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151227 ]The petitioners have called in question, their suspension from the service order dated 01.04.2020 and subsequent order dated 18.08.2020, whereby their reinstatement in service order dated 22.7.2020 was cancelled/withdrawn by the respondent-Secretary, Health Department, Government of Sindh.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
108 . II.A. 205/2019 Ms. Qaiser Jehan Begum Thr. Salman Hussain Memon V/S Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) & Others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Specific Relief Act, , Civil Procedure Code CPC (Order VII R.11)
[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151207 ]the provisions of Section 42 were misconstrued by Courts below. A plaint could only be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC if it is barred by law. None of the provisions of law was cited by respondent???s counsel and/or find mention in the orders/judgment of two Courts below whereby a plaint of the suit of the appellant could be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC. The appellant had a cause of action on account of a threat to her property in view of alleged unlawful and illegal construction beingraised on the adjacent plot.Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
109 . Const. P. 3100/2016 Ms. Surriya Kanwal V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151138 ]whether the resignation once tendered by the civil servant voluntarily and accepted by the competent authority and communicated to him/her could be considered to be final and cannot be revoked afterwards?Read more
Matter:SERVICE
110 . M.A. 1/2017 Show Time Cable & Datacom Pvt Limited V/S PEMRA & Another Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012, Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Rules, 2009 (Rule 5), PEMRA Ordinance, 2002 (section 13), PEMRA Ordinance, 2002
[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151117 ]Two propositions/counts are as under: (i) That for the impugned decision an opinion was sought from the Regional Council of Complaints which had no jurisdiction under the ibid Ordinance to comment and/or recommend any opinion ,as far as dispute is concerned; (ii) That even if such recommendations are ignored to have been forwarded by the Council of Complaints and the impugned order be seen as an independent decision of PEMRA then again, the details of the outstanding dues does not seems to generate from PEMRA Ordinance 2002, Regulations 2011-12 and PEMRA Rules 2009, and hence are/were illegal and unlawful, and could be struck down by this Court on merit. -So far as the first question as raised by the appellant is concerned, is answered in affirmative that the Council of Complaints had no jurisdiction for rendering opinion/recommendation to PEMRA ???under the Ordinance??? and its role in this regard and the advice sought is of no avail and merits no consideration; it should have been an independent order of PEMRA in view of provisions of PEMRA Ordinance. - Schedule-B attached to these rules enables PEMRA to recover in-house channel fee for cable TV. Table VI provides licence fee of Rs.175,000/-upto10,000 subscribers as B-5 category which category appellant is enjoying followed by annual renewal of Rs.87,500/-. This amount is being paid by the appellant in terms of said rules as reflected in the outstanding dues chart hereinabove. It also enable the licensor PEMRA to recover Rs.24/-per subscriber per year which is a subscriber fee(Table VI), disclosed in horizontal column 2 in the subject chart incorporated in the impugned order. Table IX deals with in-house channel licence fee and is chargeable to all categories from B-1 to B-10. -Thus, in view of aforesaid rules and regulations, the claim is legitimate and I do not see any transgression of the PEMRA authority in claiming the amount mentioned in the impugned decision. -.It is pertinent to point out that rationale and vires of such levy and charge were argued by appellant???s counsel as the fee and other claims are claimed to be disproportionate. Perhaps these arguments could have served better had it been a case of challenging the vires of regulations and rules.Read more
Matter:AGAINST DECISION OF PEMRA
111 . Const. P. 5205/2020 Prof: Dr. Muhammad Zahid V/S Chancellor of Fed: Urdu University & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151150 ]Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-5205 of 2020 challenging the appointment of Search Committee and its members for the appointment of Vice Chancellor of Federal Urdu University of Arts, Sciences and Technology (FUUAST).Read more
Matter:DIRECTION
112 . Const. P. 5144/2015 Dr. Iltaf Hussain and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151154 ]they have prayed that their temporary contractual appointments/services be regularized in respondent-Water and Power Development Authority (`WAPDA`) without discrimination, with a further assertion that they have already served in WAPDA for a considerable period and they have the legitimate expectation for appointment on regular basis rather than joining fresh process with other candidates--Read more
Matter:APPOINTMENT
113 . Const. P. 5025/2016 Imdad Ali Abro & Ors V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151130 ]the petitioners are seeking the up-gradation of the post of Computer Operator/Assistant Computer Programmer BS-16 to 17--we are clear that petitioners proceeded on erroneous premises. On the issue of up-gradation, we seek guidance from the decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court rendered in the cases of the Government of Pakistan M/o. Railways v. Jamshed Hussain Cheema and others, 2016 SCMR 442, Regional Commissioner Income Tax, Northern Region, Islamabad, and another Vs. Syed Munawar Ali and others (2017 PLC (C.S.) 1030) and Federal Public Service Commission v. Anwar-ul-Haq (2017 SCMR 890). Therefore, in our view, the petitioners have been unable to make out a case for the up-gradation/re-designation of their posts in BPS-17 with retrospective effect, based on discrimination under Article 25 of the Constitution.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
114 . Cr.J.A 85/2019 Ahsan Marfani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151450 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Above 7 Years)Read more
115 . Const. P. 4674/2018 Pakistan Services Ltd V/S Full Bench NIRC & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151091 ](i) Whether Petitioner-PSL has locus standi to approach this Court as an aggrieved party under Article 199 of the Constitution against the decisions of NIRC? (ii) Whether petitioner-PSL is a Trans-Provincial Organization and falls within the ambit of National Industrial Relations Act, 2012? (iii) Whether or not the registration of industry-wise trade unions by the Registrar, Trade Union NIRC, Islamabad is violative of the mandatory requirement of Section 8 of Act, 2012, based on strength of workforce; and, liable to be canceled, in view of mandate of Section 11 of the IRA-2012? (iv) Whether the registrar of trade unions and/or NIRC is competent to determine the registration of the respondent unions?Read more
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
116 . Const. P. 5779/2019 Nisar Ahmed Baloch V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151092 ]the petitioner has prayed for issuance of the writ of quo warranto against respondents 4 to 11, inter-alia, on the ground that they are not fit, eligible and qualified to hold the office of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, and Senior Registrar in Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical College Lyari, Karachi, (???SMBBMC???) and their future appointments in SMBBMC on contract are hit by Article 199 (1) (b) (ii) of the Constitution, 1973.Read more
Matter:QUO WARRANTO
117 . Const. P. 79/2021 Mst. Haseena V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at LarkanaRule NisiRead more
118 . Cr.Misc. 85/2021 Zaffar Dero V/S SHO P.S Hamal & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana22 A-BRead more
119 . Const. P. 1914/2020 Amir Akbar Khan V/S NAB & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151070 ]Applicability of the regime of sections 204 and 91 Cr.P.C. to a Reference under the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.Read more
Matter:BAIL
120 . Const. P. 985/2020 Muhammad Irfan S/o Muhammad Yousuf Nagori V/S Zahid Hussain and others Sindh High Court, KarachiRent: Default and personal need.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
121 . Const. P. 983/2020 Muhammad Iqbal Yousuf S/o Muhammad Yousuf Nagori V/S Zahid Hussain and others Sindh High Court, KarachiRent: Default and personal need.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
122 . Const. P. 984/2020 Muhammad Saleem Nagori S/o Muhammad Yousuf Nagori V/S Zahid Hussain and others Sindh High Court, KarachiRent: Default and personal need.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
123 . Criminal Appeal 51/2013 Mujahid Ali Dawachi and another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151449 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Life)Read more
124 . Const. P. 2623/2021 Nabeel Rashid V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, KarachiShort order passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito in C.P. No.D-2526 and 2623 of 2021 challenging the physical examinations of A, AS and O levels. The petitions have been disposed of with certain directions.Read more
Matter:EXAMINATION
125 . Const. P. 4896/2020 Muzaffar Hussain Katpar V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151069 ]suspension orderRead more
Matter:SERVICE
126 . Const. P. 2805/2021 Dr. Shamim Qureshi V/S J.S.M.U and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151036 ]
Matter:SERVICE
127 . Const. P. 3585/2018 Misri V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151032 ]termination--Sindh Madressatul Islam UniversityRead more
Matter:SERVICE
128 . Const. P. 2526/2021 Shumaila Salman Shah & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakisan & Ors Sindh High Court, KarachiShort order passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito in C.P. No.D-2526 and 2623 of 2021 challenging the physical examinations of A, AS and O levels. The petitions have been disposed of with certain directions.Read more
Matter:EXAMINATION
129 . Cr.Rev 5/2019 Chatto Khan Suhandro V/S Ghulam Nabi Suhandro and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151018 ]Against Order of Trial CourtRead more
130 . Criminal Appeal 3/2021 Nakeef Nindwani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151447 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Upto 7 Years)Read more
131 . Criminal Appeal 4/2021 Nakeef Nindwani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151448 ]Against Order of Trial Court(Upto 7 Years)Read more
132 . Const. P. 6462/2019 Muhammad Najam V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151035 ]deceased quotaRead more
Matter:DECEASED QUOTA
133 . Const. P. 4003/2019 Munaza Yasmeen and Ors V/S Learned / Hon Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151011 ]the petitioners have assailed the findings of the learned Single Bench of National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC), Karachi whereby their Grievance Petitions were dismissed with direction to the respondent-Pakistan International Airline Company to allow joining period to them till 13.06.2019.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
134 . Const. P. 6192/2020 Imtiaz Hussain V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151030 ]quo warrantoRead more
Matter:DIRECTION
135 . Const. P. 7700/2019 Husnain Ali and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151033 ]Health Department, Government of Sindh, whereby the petitioners may be allowed to pursue their academic medical career subject to extraordinary leave (without pay) for the required period--At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners in substance has pleaded discrimination as they were not sent for training within time, however, he has seriously submitted that their other batch mates on the same consideration were considered and were sent for training and the petitioners were left out except petitioners No.6, 9, 10, and 14.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
136 . Const. P. 200/1989 Wazir Ali Industries V/S Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh High Court, Karachiapplicant Muhammad Javed Khan, who is the son of late Abdul Wahid Khan/surety, has prayed that the surety documents submitted by his above named late father with the Nazir of this Court be returned to him.Read more
Matter:NATURE OF CASE NOT ENTERED
137 . Const. P. 2395/2021 Abdul Basit V/S The Secretary SWWB & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150970 ]The aforesaid petition is virtually against the transfer and posting order of the private respondent on Own Pay Scale basis.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
138 . Const. P. 2410/2021 Abdul Basit V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150974 ]promotion issueRead more
Matter:SERVICE
139 . Const. P. 4287/2020 Sahib Khan Lund Baloch V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150949 ]Petitioner, who is serving at present as Assistant Commissioner in BPS-17, is aggrieved by the purported decision of the Provincial Selection Board-II (`PSB-II`) dated 09.3.2020 and 11.3.2020, whereby his promotion to the post of Deputy Secretary (Equivalent BPS-18) was deferred on the ground that his Annual Confidential Reports (`ACRs`)Read more
Matter:SERVICE
140 . Const. P. 2129/2018 Muhammad Akram V/S M/s. Jamia Imamia Trust & Others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979
It is immaterial for the tenant as towho are the trustees and how those trustees were/are being replaced. It is indoor/internal management of the trustees and trust which has nothing to do with the relationship of landlord and tenant between Jamia ImamiaTrust and thepetitioner. None of thealleged trustees who were deprived of any benefit of being a trustee was cited as a witness or summoned by the petitioner.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
141 . Const. P. 1028/2019 Raees Baig and others V/S Hameed Baig (since deceased) thr. LRs & Others Sindh High Court, KarachiThe petitioner in the earlier round of litigation has made an attempt that in the absence of any title of the property in question the solitary statement of the cross-examination of the applicant/respondent should not be a decisive factor. Rightly so and for that matter the case was remanded to the trial court/Rent Controller so that the petitioners may support their pleadings on the strength of their evidence but they have failed. None of the petitioners stood in the witness box to rebut the contents of the application or the affidavit/statement made on oath and the cross-examination as observed earlier. In the cross-examination this burden of proving the relationship was diluted by the petitioner/opponent himself by raising a question that the rent of the demise premises was paid upto December 2002, which suggestion was denied by landlord/respondent. The counsel also inquired the applicant/respondent as to rent of which period was paid, which was replied that the rent was paid for the years 1966 to 1975. Thus in absence of any evidence on the part of Petitioner and on the strength of the affidavit-in-evidence of the respondent and the cross-examination conducted, the two courts below held the relationship of landlord and tenant in the second round as well.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
142 . Const. P. 1002/2018 Mohsin Raffan Khan V/S XIVth Civil & Family Judge, & Others Sindh High Court, KarachiAlthough it was an independent burden on the respondent No.2, which ought to have been discharged independently butthe burden was diluted when petitioner???s/defendant???scounsel herself suggested in the cross-examination that when they shifted at the rented house, they took all the dowry articles from her mother in law???s house. By this question the dowry articles, list of which is independently attached, were concededRead more
Matter:FAMILY MATTER
143 . Const. P. 1761/2020 Abu Hashim & another V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150925 ]Judgment in NADRA case passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan whereby the show cause notices issued under Section 18 of NADRA Ordinance, 2000 are quashed. The blocking of CNICs of the petitioners was declared illegal.Read more
Matter:RESTORATION OF C.N.I.C
144 . Const. P. 848/2020 M/S. ADAMJEE IMPEX V/S SHAIKH MUHAMMAD KHALID & OTHERS Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 16)
In view of above, I found that the orders passed under section 16(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was harsh inasmuch as it struck off the defence without a proper scrutiny of ledgers ofthe rent that has already been deposited in MRC, interestingly in the name of same landlord and there could have been no inconvenience to the respondent/landlord for the recovery of amount from such MRC.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
145 . Const. P. 1028/2020 Allah Rakha V/S Abdul Rehman Sindh High Court, KarachiThe petitioner was tenant of the subject premises of the respondent. Statutory notice under Section 18 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was served on the petitioner on 15.12.2017. It is claimed that the rent upto February 2018 was deposited in Suit No.1153/2008 in terms of order of court, however, notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, was issued to the petitioner who, despite receipt of the notice, has not tendered the rent of March, 2018 till 17th October, 2018, when for the first time it is contended that the money order was sent. By that time the default of March to July, 2018 has already been committed, even if the rent was required to be deposited in 60 days of its becoming due.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
146 . M.A. 24/2021 Muhammad Rameez Dar S/o Liaquat Dar (Late) V/S Learned IXth ADJ, Karachi (South) Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Succession Act
There is nothing on record to ascertain as to how learned Additional District Judge came up with the valuation of immovable property at Rs.1,50,00,000/-as schedule of property discloses it at Rs.10 Million. Unless otherwise evidence and material is available,such statement/schedule which is filed along with memo of petition should not have been discarded or ignored.Read more
Matter:SUCESSION MATTERS
147 . R.A (Civil Revision) 74/2021 Ziauddin Gabol S/o Amin Gabol V/S Nabi Bukhsh and others Sindh High Court, Karachin application for leave to defend was filed by applicant in a summary suit filed for recovery of Rs.14,915,000/-.While considering the leave to defend application,the Court granted the leave to the effect that only 1/3 of the total claim was required to be submitted in terms of surety, which order is impugned in this revision application. Prima facie it appears that a fair discretion was exercised by the trial Court. This is no defence that he (applicant) has no financial means for submitting surety in terms of Order XXXVII CPC.Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
148 . R.A (Civil Revision) 68/2021 Mst. Naseem Kausar and others Thr. Junaid Safdar V/S Sardar Abdul Rehman Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Civil Procedure Code CPC, LIMITATION (Limitation Act 1908)
Reader and even for that matter court had no jurisdiction to extend time for filing leave application against statutory period and that too without any justified reason. By that time the service has already been effected at least by publication on 06.12.2020. In terms of Order XXXVII Rule 3, CPC, the leave to defend application is supposed to have been filed within the period prescribed therein.Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
149 . Const. P. 427/2021 Ghulam Farooq V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150904 ]In our view, no candidate shall be appointed to a post unless after such medical examination as Government may prescribe such candidate is found medically fit to discharge the duties of the post. In the present case, the petitioner was relieved from the duties on medical grounds and his appeal was rejected on the same analogy. Besides above, the assertion of the petitioner is misconceived on the premise that he obtained a medical examination fitness test certificate on 02.12.2019 after the rejection of his appeal, on 14.5.2019, thus this document could not be taken into consideration, besides the respondents have relied upon the documents which prima facie show adverse inference against him. Thus, at this stage, we cannot declare him medically fit or otherwise for the subject post, which was a contractual position and by efflux of time expired.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
150 . Const. P. 6300/2020 Bashir Ahmed Abbasi Kalhoro V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150902 ]Prima facie under the Sindh Rules of Business, 1986, the Chief Minister is the Chief Executive of the Province; and, has no direct role whatsoever in the matter of a Junior School Teacher, about his appointment, posting, transfer, promotion, and disciplinary issues. On the aforesaid proposition, the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of The STATE v. ANWAR SAIF ULLAH KHAN (PLD 2016 Supreme Court 276)Read more
Matter:SERVICE
151 . Const. P. 2191/2021 Saeed Akhter V/S Govt. of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150903 ]Primarily, this petition has served its purpose, which is disposed of in the terms, whereby the competent authority of the respondent-department is directed to issue posting and transfer orders of the petitioner and the private respondent, if no disciplinary proceedings are pending against them, strictly under the schedule of the establishment of law department KMC, with correct description/designation of their respective posts as per their entitlement under the law. The said exercise shall be undertaken within two weeks from the date of this order.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
152 . Const. P. 321/2021 Shafiq Ahmed S/o Shabbir Ahmed V/S Iftikhar Hussain Qureshi and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 16), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 18)
Petitioner was inducted in the premises as tenant. He claimed to be in relation with the brother of respondent No.1 Iftikhar Hussain Qureshi as landlord/ tenant who sold this property to his brother. The status of the petitionerwith regard to premises in question would thus remain as a tenant. Petitioner has claimed that no notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was served however he concedes that despite receipt of notice of eviction application and the documents,he did not tender the rent to the new landlordi.e. respondent No.1.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
153 . Const. P. 948/2020 Muhammad Khalid S/o Wazir Ahmed Khan V/S The Court of IVth ADJ, Karachi Central and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Family Courts Act, 1964, Sindh Civil Court Rules
The objections were to the extent that in a family suit the plaintiff seeking Khulla cannot be represented by her attorney. Learned counsel in support of this contention has cited Rule 85 of the Sindh Civil Court Rules and Section 18 of the Family Courts Act, 1964. So far as the earlier Rule of Sindh Chief Court is concerned, the same is not applicable to the proceedings in hand as they are governed by the Family Courts Act, 1964 and perhaps there is no applicability of such rule even on merit. Similarly, so far as Section 18 of the Family Court Act is concerned, it enables a Pardah Nasheen lady to be permitted and represented by an authorized agent. This is an enabling provision and does not restrict the right of a plaintiff who intends to proceed the matter through an attorney to represent her in the court of law including a family suit for the dissolution of marriage.Read more
Matter:FAMILY MATTER
154 . R.A (Civil Revision) 71/2021 Shakeel Abu Bakar S/o Abu Bakar V/S Muhammad Bilal Lakhani and another Sindh High Court, KarachiIn a summary suit pending in the Court of XI-AdditionalDistrict Judge Karachi East,conditional leave was grantedto the applicant who admitted the signatures on the dishonored cheques. Irrespective of the amount involvedand irrespective of the fact whether applicant could furnish surety of the amount, as directedby the trial Court, thereis no justificationin interfering in the order of the trial Courtwhich has exercised its jurisdiction/discretion by extending the leave subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.7.5 Million,which amount is equivalent to the amount of dishonored cheques involved in the summary suit.Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
155 . Const. P. 315/2021 Waqas Ahmed S/o Waqar Ahmed V/S Mst. Maryam Hafeez and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Guardian and Ward Act, 1890
Though under section 14 of the Family Court Act, 1964a decision is appealable however considering the facts and circumstances when interim meeting was ordered to be arranged in terms of the order ofthe trial Court theorder was not interfered by the appellate Court. Trial Court has exercised their right and maintained by appellate Court and such discretion being rightly exercised cannot be interfered. There is nothing to interfere in the interim arrangement,which seems to be lawful and justified.Read more
Matter:FAMILY MATTER
156 . Const. P. 2328/2021 Muhammad Tanveer V/S M/s Pakistan Steel Mills Corp Ltd and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150905 ]
Matter:SERVICE
157 . M.A. 5/2021 Jaag Broadcasting Systems (Private) Limited V/S Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: PEMRA Ordinance, 2002
-Once a decision was taken for the withdrawal of the complaint and to refer it to Council of Complaints, Karachi (Sindh) there should be some logical reasons for not referring it to the Council of Complaints, Karachi (Sindh). Logic and reason existed when it was withdrawn from Council of Complaints, KPK to Council of Complaints, Sindh. It was exclusive prerogative of PEMRA and not Council of Complaints, KPK.Read more
Matter:AGAINST DECISION OF PEMRA
158 . II.A. 35/2017 Syed Fasih Iqbal Thr. his Legal Heirs & Others V/S Hassan Sardar & Others Sindh High Court, KarachiPerhaps deciding issue No.1 afresh in this third tier of litigation would be harsh as any party aggrieved of it would be deprived of right of appeal. A fair judicial proceedings includes a right of appeal and only then the spirit of fair trial could be materialized. In my humble view this issue ought to have been decided on merit by the Courts below so that it could be decided conclusively whether any rights in the property were delegated by defendant No.1/applicant to defendant No.2/respondent No.2as only then attorney could delegate such rights further to the plaintiff i.e. respondent No.1 herein as his sub-attorney and a decree of lawful purchaser could be passed in favour of respondent No.1Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT
159 . Const. P. 6604/2020 Nasim Ahmed Memon V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150847 ]the petitioner is an educationist and has been serving in the Public Education Sector in Sindh since 1987. Per learned counsel the Universities and Boards Department, the Government of Sindh, Karachi invited application for the position of ???Chairman-Board??? and petitioner was one of the candidates for the aforesaid post--Read more
Matter:APPOINTMENT
160 . R.A (Civil Revision) 55/2019 Muhammad Tobria S/o Ismail V/S The Board of Trustee KPT and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Karachi Port Trust Act, 1886 (Section 87)
- The licences on which respondents were relying were expired somewhere in 2013. After the expiry of the alleged licences the Karachi Port Trust started receiving amount as being ???lease money??? and a period of lease was also disclosed in the challans issued by Karachi Port Trust to applicants though separately describing them as licensee as well. - In this primary examination perhaps the respondents have not demonstrated to have passed the criteria and test to adjudge them (applicants) as licencees. Since the rental receipts were issued for a lease period, as available on record, therefore, notice under section 87 of the KPT Act for the eviction cannot be read to have been issued in pursuance of the aforesaid Act as a lessee cannot be evicted without due process of law. Hence, such action is not deemed to have been taken or purported to have been taken under the ibid Act. - When an action was not deemed to have been taken under the Act, the barring provision of Section 87 would not apply and plaint in this regard for a colourable exercise of powers by official of KPT cannot be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC. It requires a trial as to whether action was in accordance with law or otherwise. The appeal preferred by the applicants met the same fate as it was dismissed. - I am of the firm view that the issue of notice of eviction to an occupant of the nature as described above is not warranted under the law and on such threat of eviction he cannot wait for a period mentioned in the barring section i.e. Section 87 of KPT Act and is not covered by any of the provisions of Act when status of applicants is adjudged as lessee in the last challan issued. It needs trial for a conclusive determination. When the applicants claimed to have been in occupation as lessee by virtue of challan issued to them the status of licencee was not carried forward and altered to a status of lessee by virtue of such challan and the descriptions provided therein. This is at least tentative view which should have been formedRead more
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
161 . I.T.R.A 13/2018 THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE V/S M/S MSC SWITZERLAND GENEVA Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150784 ]Implication of double taxation treaties upon super tax.Read more
Matter:INCOME TAX
162 . Const. P. 4112/2019 Muhammad Imran V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150783 ]Petitioner seeks appointment in the Karachi University as Adhoc Teacher, based on differently-abled quota on the premise that he was/is a qualified and fit person to be considered for the subject post.Read more
Matter:APPOINTMENT
163 . II.A. 99/2012 Abdul Rahim Memon V/S Mst. Amna Shaikh & ors Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984
Whatever is deposed by the attorney, he deposed it on behalf of the principal on instruction and hence nothing could be taken away on the count that it was hearsay -Plaintiff/respondent has also examined one of the witnesses of the agreement whereas the other had expired and hence according to Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, it was otherwise proved through the evidence available on record. On the other hand the appellant examined himself only without corroboration of any other witnesses. Even defendants No.2 and 3 did not turn up to examine themselves and/or to support the appellant/defendant No.1.Read more
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
164 . Cr.Bail 99/2021 Ameer Bux Khoso & others V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at LarkanaBAIL BEFORE ARRESTRead more
165 . Const. P. 2513/2021 Asif Ali Unar and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150781 ]posting and transfer of District Food Controllers (DFCs) and Assistant District Food Controllers (ADFCs) in Food Department, Government of Sindh--Before parting with this order, we may observe that the transfer and posting is the prerogative of the respondent department as provided under Section 10 of the Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973. However, the petitioners have raised the hue and cry in the matter with the assertion that their transfer and posting is based on malafide intention to accommodate the beneficiaries to usurp the huge amount or kickbacks in the disbursement of wheat in their respective area. If this is the factual position of the case, the Chief Secretary, Sindh, and Secretary Food Department, Government of Sindh, are directed to look into the affairs of disbursement of wheat in the Province of Sindh personally and ensure that the wheat is disbursed strictly under the law.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
166 . Const. P. 242/2021 Uzma Bibi W/o Shabar Khan V/S Bakht Roman and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:RENT MATTER
167 . Const. P. 154/2021 TARIQ MASOOD V/S SHER MUHAMMAD DIN & OTHERS Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979
The respondent may have proved the ownership of the property but then the relationship of landlord and tenant has to be established independently. It has to be proved through reliable evidence and documents that applicant/respondent apart from being owner of property was also the landlord of the occupant.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
168 . Const. P. 2695/2017 Syed Muhammad S/o Muhammad Anwar V/S Noorullah & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150697 ]-The petitioner while making such statement of alleged purchase has not realized the burden he took over. There is a marked difference in the probative value of entering into possession for the first time as tenant, and continuing in possession with claim of change in its nomenclature. Where occupant claiming his continuous possession as other than original character, it is expected that some trustworthy evidence in furtherance of his subsequently claimed character would be shown, failing whereof his admitted character would concur (Reliance2). -This PT-1 was then followed by another PT-1, which is claimed by the respondent No.1. This PT-1 then followed by notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. While recovering taxes in terms of the gross annual rental value, as assessed by authority under ibid Act, constructive possession of the respondent No.1 had been identified and regulated. It may not constitute the ownership but it does authorize the one who was found in constructive possession, to regulate his possession as required under the law. This was thus a jura possession recognized by Sindh Urban Immovable Property Tax Act and rules framed thereunder of 1958. Thus having constructive jura possession with reference to property in question, an authoritative recognition in the shape of PT-1 was issued. -This PT-1 would enable the respondent No.1 to deal with his possession as deem fit and proper under the law. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1 was and is responsible for payment of annual gross rental value and it is not in dispute that in terms of Section 14 of Sindh Urban Immovable Property Tax Act, 1958, the tax recoverable from any person on account of any building or land, if found in arrears, it shall be lawful for the proscribed authority to serve upon any person paying rent in respect of that building or land or any part thereof to the person from whom the arrears are due, a notice for the recovery of such taxes may be issued to the tenants or one from whom such taxes are required in terms of PT-1. It also enables the authority that if a person willfully fails or neglects to comply with the notice, the authority may after giving him an opportunity of being heard proceed against him as it could have proceeded under the provisions of this act against the defaulter of the tax. -Thus, in my view this PT-1 authorizes respondent No.1 to deal with this property as deem fit and proper and a lawful notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was issued to the petitioner to apprise him about the current situation as to the change of PT-1 and authority of new landlord.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
169 . Const. P. 6241/2016 Anjum Badar V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Service matters (Contract appointments)
[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150727 ]petitioners have prayed that their temporary contractual appointments / services be regularized in BPS-17 under Section 3 of The Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013---Whether temporary employees appointed on contract in BS 16 and above can be deemed to have been validly appointed on regular basis, without going through the competitive process of selection through the Sindh Public Service Commission, merely in view of Section 3 of the Act of 2013 ?--Whether the mandatory requirement of competitive process of selection only through the Sindh Public Service Commission for appointments in BS 16 and above, which is the command of the Constitution and specific direction to the Government of Sindh by the Hon???ble Supreme Court, can be waived, relaxed, done away with, exempted and or bypassed in view of Section 3 of the Act of 2013 ?--Whether the petitioners have any vested right for regular appointment, or to claim regularization, or to approach this Court in its constitutional jurisdiction to seek redressal of their grievance relating to regularization ; and, is there any corresponding legal duty cast on the Government of Sindh to appoint them on regular basis ? If no, then can a writ of mandamus to this effect be issued against the Government of Sindh ? --Whether Section 3 of the Act of 2013, to the extent of regularization / appointment in BS 16, 17 and 18 without the mandatory competitive process of selection through the Sindh Public Service Commission, is ultra vires the Constitution and against the law laid down and the direction given by the Hon???ble Supreme Court to the Government of Sindh in Ali Azhar Khan Baloch and others V/S Province of Sindh and others, 2015 SCMR 456.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
170 . Const. P. 8065/2019 Abdul Latif Narejo and Ors V/S E.O.B.I and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150765 ]we asked the learned counsel for respondent-Institution under what law and authority they attempted to nullify the effect of the judgment passed by this Court, maintained by the Hon???ble Supreme Court as discussed supra.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
171 . II.A. 70/2016 Muhammad Farooq V/S Ranomal and others Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Contract Act
I have reached to the conclusion that perhaps these power of attorney and sub-power of attorney are to be read with the sale agreement and sale consideration and the contents of the power of attorney which may be looked into in terms of Section 200 and 202 of the Contract Act and some view had to be formed whether it coupled with interest. In that case if the property was not enjoyed by Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited it was surely enjoyed by one of the Directors i.e. Allah Dino Behan and at one point of time the widow of Allah Dino Behan i.e. Mominat Behan, may be as chief executive of Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited, entered into agreement of sale, having share in it. The sale consideration for plot was paid by Allah Dino Behan. If at all for any technical reason the performance could not be sought against Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited, it could well be asked against an individual Allah Dino Behan and/or widow Mominat who acquired share in it when she entered into agreement.Read more
Matter:AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT
172 . II.A. 63/2021 Abdul Hameed S/o (Late) Abdul Majeed V/S Malik Haq Nawaz and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
173 . R.A (Civil Revision) 36/2020 SYED IMRAN V/S SYED SOHAIL HASAN & OTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
174 . II.A. 61/2021 Kamran Zafar S/o Shams ul Zafar V/S Muhammad Idrees and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER
175 . Const. P. 308/2021 Mst. Saima D/o Fareed ul Hassan V/S Mst. Marium Bibi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:RENT MATTER
176 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 417/2018 Collector of Customs V/S Niaz Muhammad & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150672 ]Exclusion in SRO 499 of 2009.Read more
Matter:CUSTOM MATTER
177 . Suit 701/2021 Shakir Ahmed Khan V/S Nishat Akhtar Khan & others Sindh High Court, KarachiLatest report be called from learned XXIInd Judicial Magistrate Karachi East in Criminal Case No.1344/2019. Also issue notice to the SSP and SHO concerned to produce defendants 1, 2 and 3 before this Court on the next date of hearing. To be listed on 24.05.2021 at 11:00 am.Read more
Matter:DECLARATION
178 . Const. P. 1074/2018 Mst. Parveen Ara V/S Muhammad Hanif & Another Sindh High Court, KarachiTopic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 15 )
Evidence available does not fulfill the requirement of Section 15-A of the SRPO as it has to be proved independently that the premises was re-let. Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to prove its contention through evidence that it was a misuse of section 15 of the SRPO whereby the eviction of the petitioner was acquired through a mala fide attempt.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
179 . Const. P. 2001/2021 Mirza Anwer Mehmood Baig V/S DG C.A.A and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150668 ]the petitioner has sought suspension of the operation of Show Cause Notice dated 25.2.2021 issued by the respondent-Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority (???CAA???) on the accusation of production of a copy of the mark sheet No.00575 of BA (Pass) 1st and 2nd Year Examination of 1987, which was later on found fake, which amounts misconduct as provided under Civil Aviation Authority (Efficiency and Discipline) Regulations, 2014.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
180 . Const. P. 310/2021 Habib Bank Limited V/S IXth Rent Controller, Khi (Central) & another Sindh High Court, Karachi-Since statute does not provide remedy of appeal, this petition has been filed to invoke jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. By dismissal of an application under order VII rule 11 CPC, none of the fundamental right of the petitioner was violated to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. -The whole gummit of the lis is yet to be decided and hence if an appeal against such order could not be maintained, how this alternate recourse be made available, when no fundamental right of the petitioner seems to have been violated.Read more
Matter:RENT MATTER
181 . Cr.Rev 71/2011 Shabir Khoso and others V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 150817 ]Against Order of Trial CourtRead more
182 . Const. P. 4452/2013 Mir Hassan V/S Province of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150632 ]Son QuotaRead more
Matter:SON QUOTA
183 . Cr.Rev 38/2020 Pir Bux Brohi & another V/S The State & another Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 150667 ]Against Order of Trial CourtRead more
184 . Cr.Acq.A. 39/2020 Nazir Ahmed Lakhair V/S Abdul Qadir And Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 150670 ]Against Order of Trial CourtRead more
185 . Const. P. 2186/2021 Zabardast Khan Mehar V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150769 ]NAB Petition for Reduction of Surety AmountRead more
Matter:DIRECTION
186 . Const. P. 1578/2021 Muhammad Saqib V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150609 ]departmental proceedings initiated against him as contemplated under Section 3(b)(c) of the Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1988--as to how this petition is maintainable against departmental proceedings initiated against him and the final order for dismissal from service served upon him, which action of the respondent-department ought to have been assailed before the learned Sindh Service Tribunal (SST) at Karachi.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
187 . Const. P. 2707/2019 Shah Muhammad V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150567 ]the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to award him incentive of timescale i.e. BPS-17 to BPS-19, from the date of his entitlement; and, other ancillary benefits, to bring him at par with the employees of other departments of Government of Sindh--whether the petitioner is entitled to the incentive of the timescale from BPS-17 to BPS-19 under the law or otherwise.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
188 . Const. P. 2217/2021 Zeeshan Anjum and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150566 ]The main grievance of the petitioners is that their candidature for the post of Police Constable (BPS-05) has been declined without announcing the final merit list i.e. written test and interview--Prima-facie, this petition is not maintainable for the simple reason that no offer of appointment order had been issued in their favor, thus no vested right had/has accrued in favor of the petitioners.Read more
Matter:SERVICE
189 . Const. P. 6162/2020 Ghulam Shabbir V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 150553 ]reinstatement in service as Staff SDO (B&R)--immoral activities--Article 199(3) of the Constitution--Dismissed.Read more
Matter:SERVICE