1.Const. P. 3836/2021 (D.B.) Javed Solangi V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Service matters (Regularisation of Employee)

2025 SHC KHI 1653

In view of the foregoing, we are of the considered view that the matter of the petitioners needs to be processed further for regularization of their services as Naib Qasid and Driver as they have been appointed on regular posts (LARMIS), through a competitive process. 11. For all the above-mentioned reasons, we allow these petitions along with all pending application(s) in terms of order dated 07.05.2025 passed by this Court in C.P. No. D-4291 of 2020 and C.P. No. D-7528 of 2018, which decision was upheld by the Supreme Court vide order dated August 24 2023 in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 517-K of 2023.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

2.Spl.Cr.Bail 110/2025 (S.B.) SYED ABU BILAL IMAM S/O ABU NASSAR V/S THE STATE THR DANISH QAMAR (DY.COMMISSIONER, LTO Sindh High Court, Karachi

At the time offence of tax fraud was allegedly committed, it did not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 CrPC. Bail granted.

Read more

Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

3.Const. P. 1276/2025 (D.B.) M/s Abbott Laboratories (Pakistan) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Drug Pricing Policy 2018

2025 SHC KHI 1731

Mandatory and directory provisions; Rules 7 and 10 of Drug Pricing Policy 2018 interpreted

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST ORDER

---

4.Criminal Appeal 537/2023 (D.B.) SYED AMANULLAH S/O SYED SARWAR SHAH V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1729
Matter:-LIFE IMPRISONMENT

---

5.Const. P. 1851/2024 (D.B.) Dr. Feroz Alam Jafri V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1722

Recommendation and Decision of Selection Board and Synidcate Set aside Karachi University directed to conduct selection process of Professor and Associate Professor in Food Science and Technology Department afresh

Read more

Matter:-APPOINTMENT

---

6.Const. P. 1638/2022 (D.B.) Syed Muhammad Jamshed & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1721

Regularization to seek regularization initial contract appointment must be in accordance with law

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE / REGULARIZATION

---

7.Const. P. 882/2020 (D.B.) Arif Pasha V/S P.O Sindh & Other Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1712

Direction Matter

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

8.Const. P. 4962/2019 (D.B.) Altaf Hussain Abro and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1703

discrimination in service safeguarded under article 27 of the Constitution discrimination in service safeguarded under article 27 of the Constitution Petitioners be given equal treatment as given to readers of Federal Service Tribuna

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

9.Const. P. 1977/2022 (D.B.) Sajid Ahmed Khan V/S NBP & Another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1702

Factual controversy, writ not maintainable

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

10.Const. P. 755/2025 (D.B.) Nadir Ali Mahar V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-Cancellation of Tender

---

11.Const. P. 689/2025 (D.B.) Shahzado Gargage V/S The State through Pros: General Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

12.Const. P. 703/2025 (D.B.) Taimoor V/S The state Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

13.Const. P. 740/2025 (D.B.) Zaffar V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

14.Const. P. 715/2025 (D.B.) Mst. Mirzadi Bozdar V/S P.O Sindh & another Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

15.Const. P. 705/2025 (D.B.) Chakar Bozdar V/S The state Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

16.Const. P. 675/2025 (D.B.) Abid Ali Shar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

17.Const. P. 716/2025 (D.B.) Mst. Hakimzadi V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

18.Const. P. 857/2025 (D.B.) Parveez Ahmed V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-Demarcation

---

19.Const. P. 739/2025 (D.B.) Kamran @ Dadlo Bozdar V/S P.O Sindh & another Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

20.Criminal Appeal 148/2024 (S.B.) Kamran V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1691
Matter:-Imprisonment(More than 5 Upto 10 years)

---

21.Cr.J.A 275/2018 (S.B.) MST. RAZIA V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1690, 2025 SHC HYD 1692, 2025 SHC HYD 1693
Matter:-Life Imprisonment

---

22.Const. P. 699/2025 (D.B.) Qutub Din Lakhan V/S The state & others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

23.Const. P. 698/2025 (D.B.) Shahzado Bhayo V/S The state & others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

24.Const. P. 666/2025 (D.B.) Allahyar Dashti V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

25.Const. P. 704/2025 (D.B.) Moula Bakhsh V/S The state Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-POST ARREST BAIL

---

26.Cr.Rev 109/2024 (S.B.) Ahmed Ali V/S Rahib Hussain & Another Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1696, 2025 SHC HYD 1697, 2025 SHC HYD 1698
Matter:-435 & 439 Cr.P.C

---

27.R.A (Civil Revision) 37/2024 (S.B.) Muhammad Irfan V/S M/S Hassan Construction Co & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Matter:-Against Order

---

28.Const. P. 964/2022 (D.B.) Mst. Ayesha & another V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1647, 2025 SHC HYD 1694
Matter:-DECLARATION

---

29.II.A. 239/2019 (S.B.) M/s. Sidat Hyder Morshed Associates (Pvt.) Ltd V/S Trade Development Authority of Pakistan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1600
Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

30.Const. P. 150/2025 (D.B.) Dr.Tariq Hasan Memon V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: WAPDA CASES

2025 SHC HYD 1604, 2025 SHC HYD 1616

WAPDA Employees: Exclusive Jurisdiction of Federal Service Tribunal under Article 212 of the Constitution

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

31.Const. P. 7430/2018 (D.B.) Syed Adnan Zaidi V/S M.D KW & SB and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1657, 2025 SHC KHI 1670

In light of these facts, this court direct the competent authority of the respondents to re-inquire into the Petitioner's status and if no formal punishment was ultimately awarded for the purported misconduct, his salary will be released, subject to verification of his service record. This process must be completed within three months. 9. This petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

32.Const. P. 2872/2021 (D.B.) Amir Ali and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1658, 2025 SHC KHI 1671

In this specific case, the petition appears to be in conflict with the Federal Government's up-gradation policy outlined in the Establishment Division O.M. dated September 11, 2018. Furthermore, the petitioners' cadre already has a clear path for promotion under the Recruitment Rules notified on August 2, 2012, which provide for career progression up to BS-20. The respondents have pointed out that the petitioners are only citing paragraph 1 of the O.M. dated February 2, 2012, while deliberately omitting paragraph 2, which clearly upgrades various posts. The formulation of SRO 953(1)/2012 dated August 2, 2012, was necessary due to the merger of the Inland Revenue cadres of the former Income Tax Group (ITG), Sales Tax Department (STD), and Directorate of Reforms & Statistics (DR&S) into the newly formed Inland Revenue Department under the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR). Given this existing promotion avenue, up-gradation is not permissible under the law for the petitioners. The Office Memorandum dated September 11, 2018, explicitly states that up-gradation is only considered for isolated cadres that lack promotion opportunities. Since the petitioners' cadre has clear avenues for promotion, they have no valid claim for an up-gradation as a matter of right. They have a defined career progression up to BS-20 as per the Recruitment Rules. 8. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this petition stands dismissed along with the listed application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

33.Const. P. 3835/2021 (D.B.) Junaid Khalil V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1654, 2025 SHC KHI 1666, 2025 SHC KHI 1681

In view of the foregoing, we are of the considered view that the matter of the petitioners needs to be processed further for regularization of their services as Naib Qasid and Driver as they have been appointed on regular posts (LARMIS), through a competitive process. 11. For all the above-mentioned reasons, we allow these petitions along with all pending application(s) in terms of order dated 07.05.2025 passed by this Court in C.P. No. D-4291 of 2020 and C.P. No. D-7528 of 2018, which decision was upheld by the Supreme Court vide order dated August 24 2023 in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 517-K of 2023.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

34.Const. P. 433/2022 (D.B.) Mir Muhammad Brohi V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1594

Grievance Notice can be sent in form of appeal, representation or review. Company can initiate disciplinary proceedings against employee within one month, wrong entry of date of birth in a proforma does not amount to misconduct.

Read more

Matter:-Reinstate

---

35.Const. P. 2668/2021 (D.B.) Dhoni Das V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1655, 2025 SHC KHI 1668

Regularization of employment hinges on legal backing. Without a specific law, policy, or rules governing regularization, an individual cannot simply petition the High Court for this relief. Both parties acknowledged that the petitioners were hired for temporary, contract-based positions, as explicitly stated in their employment contracts. These contracts also stipulated that they could not claim regularization. This aspect of the lack of qualification of the post as pointed out cannot be overlooked by this Court; these crucial details cannot be basis of principle to grant relief as they have already been nonsuited. The application of the law applied by the respondents while scrutinizing the cases of the petitioners is correct appreciation of law and supported by both regularization policy and existing legal precedents, rendering the decision of scrutiny committee valid and sustainable as the issue of qualification has been raised as this Court cannot change the disqualification into qualification. On the aforesaid proposition we are supported by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa v. Sher Aman (2022 SCMR 406). 8. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is found to be meritless and is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

36.Const. P. 1622/2025 (D.B.) Muhammad Suleman and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1589

Legitimate expectation.

Read more

Matter:-ADVERTISEMENT

---

37.II.A. 116/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Shamshad and others V/S Abdullah Khokhar and Another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1645

Provisions of Order VI Rule 4

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

38.F.R.A 7/2025 (S.B.) Mrs. Farah Shoukat W/o Shoukat Zia V/S Khursheed Inamullah Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1591
Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

39.E.P 4/2024 (S.B.) Muhammad Mubeen Bullo V/S IKramullah Khan Dharejo & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-Election Matter

---

40.Spl.Cr.Bail 119/2025 (S.B.) NASIR KHAN S/O ABDUL REHMAN & ANOTHER V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi

FIR vague as to whether Applicant was driver of the vehicle carrying smuggled diesel. Bail granted.

Read more

Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

41.Const. P. 2171/2025 (D.B.) Tahir Hussain V/S Registrar, High Court of Sindh Karachi & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Administration order of High Court not amenable to writ.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

42.Const. P. 3802/2021 (D.B.) Naveed Ahmed and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1660, 2025 SHC KHI 1673

Regularization requires an executive policy or specific statute. Absent such a policy or statute, this Court lacks jurisdiction to order regularization. 10. We find that the petitioners have failed to establish grounds for the regularization of their service. Their situation does not meet the criteria outlined in Section 3 of the Sindh (Regularization of Ad-hoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013, nor is it consistent with the Government of Sindh's regularization policy. Accordingly, the instant petition, along with all associated applications, is dismissed, and no costs are awarded.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

43.Const. P. 7606/2017 (D.B.) Khurram Faizan V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1661, 2025 SHC KHI 1674

The petitioners' case appears to be similar to that of Muhammad Afzal Soomro, previously decided by this Court, and aligns with I. A Sherwani and others vs. Government of Pakistan, 1991 SCMR 1081. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the postgraduate/LL.M. degree allowance and its benefits should be extended to the employees of the District Judiciary. The purpose behind granting this incentive is evident from the February 8, 2018, notification issued by the Universities and Boards Department, Government of Sindh, which provided a monthly allowance of Rs. 2500/- to Ph.D. degree holders in Public Sector Universities. Consequently, we direct the Finance Secretary, Sindh and Chief Secretary Sindh to examine the petitioners' case considering this notification and the dicta laid down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforementioned case and make a policy decision on the same. 10. The instant petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

44.Const. P. 4148/2020 (D.B.) Ghulam Abbass V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1663, 2025 SHC KHI 1675

We are of the considered view that the petitioners' situation regarding pensionary benefits is similar to the cases mentioned above. Their pension should be calculated from the date they were merged into TCP, rather than their later regularization dates in 2008 and 2011. This is because the petitioners were allowed to continue their service after the merger, and TCP continued to pay them until their superannuation. Since TCP acted upon the merger, any subsequent decision by the TCP Board is irrelevant. Therefore, in line with Supreme Court principles from the aforementioned cases, their pensionary benefits must be calculated from their merger date with TCP. This calculation should be completed and disbursed to them in accordance with law within three months. 13. These petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

45.Const. P. 2328/2021 (D.B.) Muhammad Tanveer V/S M/s Pakistan Steel Mills Corp Ltd and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1662, 2025 SHC KHI 1665

The petitioner's removal from service, ordered on October 20, 2009, appears unduly severe. This is because the inquiry officer had only recommended a one-stage reduction in pay. Furthermore, the petitioner was acquitted of the charges leveled by the Pakistan Steel Mills against him by a competent court. Given these circumstances, the punishment is disproportionate. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we have decided to change the punishment from removal from service to compulsory retirement, provided the petitioner meets the required length of service. The Pakistan Steel Mills, Ministry of Industry and Production, is directed to implement this change and its consequences within three months. 12. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

46.Const. P. 5227/2020 (D.B.) Noor Muhammad Sahito V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1659, 2025 SHC KHI 1672

Before parting with this order it is observed that the petitioner reached superannuation without formal retirement notification, as ACE had already repatriated him to the Services, General Administration & Coordination Department (which he failed to join in due course), and the Chief Secretary of Sindh is directed to conduct an inquiry into this matter. The inquiry should aim to determine responsibility for these actions after hearing from all involved individuals. Additionally, the Chief Secretary of Sindh is to investigate whether the petitioner is entitled to a retirement notification and associated service benefits, considering his continuous service with ACE until his superannuation. A speaking order on this aspect is to be issued within three months after hearing the petitioner. 11. For these reasons, this petition is disposed of.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

47.Const. P. 725/2025 (D.B.) Peer Bux V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1699

Constitutional Petition: Bail granted to the petitioner in a ???narcotic drug??? case under the Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 2024

Read more

Matter:-Narcotic Bail(Post Arrest)

---

48.R.A (Civil Revision) 17/2024 (S.B.) Anwal Kamal Pasha and Others V/S Mst. Aziza Jalil (Late) Thr LRs and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1559

Date of knowledge is a mixed question of law and fact.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

49.Const. P. 6608/2020 (D.B.) Chief Commissioner Inland Revenue V/S Fed: Sect: / Revisional Authority and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1548
Matter:-PROPERTY MATTER

---

50.Const. P. 897/2025 (D.B.) Hayat Ali Shah V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Deceased Son Quota

Matter:-Deceased Quota

---

51.Criminal Appeal 30/2024 (S.B.) Farooque Dashti V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1593

Trial of a Juvenile Offender under ordinary law held illegal De novo trial under Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018 Special Law overrides the general law

Read more

Matter:-Against Order of Trial Court(Above 7 Years)

---

52.Cr.Bail 116/2025 (S.B.) Shahban Ali Khero and Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1546

Modesty and honour of victim involves. Bail declined.

Read more

Matter:-Post Arrest Bail

---

53.Const. P. 3230/2022 (D.B.) Dr. Kamran Zakria and Others V/S Executive Director HEC & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1579

The court found the HEC's proposal reasonable and, direct the competent authority at HEC to resolve the subject issue at their end first within three months, in accordance with the law, after hearing the petitioners. 6. The petition is now disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

54.Criminal Appeal 80/2023 (S.B.) Bakhtiar Ali Domki V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1544

Benefit of doubt. Conviction set aside. Accused acquitted.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order of Trial Court(Life)

---

55.R.A (Civil Revision) 138/2023 (S.B.) Waqar Rahim & another V/S P.O Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1592

Revenue Court cannot cancel the entries incorporated in record of rights pursuant to a registered document.

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Judgement

---

56.Const. P. 6484/2022 (D.B.) Mst. Sumaira Shakeel & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1577

Currently, both departments are disclaiming responsibility for the appointments, despite the petitioners purportedly working in the KMC's education department. The Secretary Local Government Department (Respondent) should resolve this issue at his end by coordinating with KMC and DMC-Central, where the petitioners claimed employment. If the petitioners' appointments are verified as genuine, their regularization case must be considered. This petition is accordingly disposed of, with the regularization process to be completed within three months, contingent on the petitioners' educational qualifications and eligibility for the respective posts.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

57.Const. P. 5602/2020 (D.B.) Bilal Mirza V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1580

The respondents' actions in this case appear negligent and reckless. It seems the departmental inquiry was intentionally skipped, creating procedural loopholes to technically benefit the petitioner. Remanding this case for a new inquiry now seems futile. Given the petitioner???s past conduct, a new inquiry would likely be a mere formality, potentially leading to the petitioner's reinstatement with full back benefits, effectively nullifying the punishment. After such a significant time lapse, an inquiry would not serve any constructive purpose by the order of this court. However, since the petitioner was removed with a stigma and seemingly denied a proper chance to present his defense, he is free to apply to the competent authority for a revival of proceedings from the beginning, following due legal process. If the respondents have concrete evidence against the petitioner, the law shall be followed in the strict sense; however, the competent authority, before deciding on the subject proposition, shall hear the petitioner without fail. The respondents shall also look into the decision of the Supreme Court. This exercise must be undertaken within three months. 8. This petition is disposed of in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Senior Superintendent of Police Vs Shahid Nazir 2022 SCMR 327.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

58.Cr.Bail 44/2025 (S.B.) Arbab Ali Shaikh V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1547

Modesty and honour of victim involves. Bail declined.

Read more

Matter:-Post Arrest Bail

---

59.Const. P. 4810/2020 (D.B.) Tanveer Ahmed Siddiqui V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1578

It is well settled that contractual appointments ended with contract expiration/termination, and a temporary/contract employee cannot claim permanent status as a matter of right, nor can he /she be reinstated merely for continuing service beyond his/her term after reaching superannuation age. 8. This Court, under Article 199 of the Constitution, cannot order reinstatement of temporary, contract, or ad-hoc employees whose terms had ended with the termination of their contract with allegations. Here the petitioners??? contract was terminated by the order of the majority of the council members in the meeting held on 13.08.2020 and 09.09.2020, as such his contractual period cannot be extended after reaching the age of superannuation. Consequently, this petition is dismissed, with no order regarding costs.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

60.R.A (Civil Revision) 200/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Rashida Begume & Others V/S Abdul Karim & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1541

Judicial integrity upheld, fraud must be proven, not presumed. Admissions and established legal principles affirm the validity of registered documents.

Read more

Matter:-Against Judgment

---

61.Const. P. 5136/2023 (D.B.) Tanveer ul Hassan and Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1598
Matter:-COOP. HOUSING SOCIETIES

---

62.Const. P. 1400/2015 (D.B.) Lt. Commander (R) Engr: Abdul Aziz Narejo V/S K.P.T and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Limitation act applies to review in CP.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

63.Const. P. 8501/2018 (D.B.) Mushtaq Ahmed V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1561

Given that the HPSB, the competent authority, determined the petitioner was not fit for promotion to a merit-based selection post, this Court cannot re-evaluate that decision under Article 199 of the constitution at this stage, when we are in 2025. Therefore, there's no basis to invoke Article 25 of the Constitution, especially in light of the Supreme Court's decision in National Bank of Pakistan v Sajjad Ali Khaskheli (2023 PLC(CS) 276), which held that there is no provision for proforma promotion in relevant service rules. This is further supported by the fact that the petitioner has retired and received all due benefits. 8. Given the foregoing discussion, we find no merit in this petition that would warrant intervention by this Court. Therefore, the petition is dismissed, along with any pending applications.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

64.Const. P. 1299/2022 (D.B.) Muhammad Rafique Memon V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1562

With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs with direction to the competent authority of respondents to reconsider the case of promotion of the petitioner in BPS-20, within three months, in the light of dicta laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Dr. Muhammad Arif, 2017 SCMR 969; and, his earlier supersession as recorded hereinabove will not come in his way, while considering his case for promotion in next rank with his batchmates, provided he is still in NAB service.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

65.R.A (Civil Revision) 61/2019 (S.B.) Abdul Rehman Dashti V/S Niaz Ahmed Soomro & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1512

Allotment of amenity plot. Jurisdiction of Civil Court. Locus Standi of individual from public.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

66.Const. P. 1661/2024 (D.B.) Dr Rahim Bux Khokhar V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1536

Upholding statutory remedies and procedural fairness???A Judicial Review under Section 36 of MUET Act, 1977 & Paragraph 14 of MUET E&D Statutes, 1978.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

67.Const. P. 6642/2020 (D.B.) Mumtaz Ali V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1538

Consequently, the termination orders are set aside, and the petitioners are reinstated to their service. However, BISP must conduct a fresh regular inquiry within three months of the date of this order. Any back benefits or salary will be withheld pending the inquiry's outcome. However it is made clear if the inquiry exceeds the period of three months the petitioners salary of the intervening period shall be released to them subject to they work for the BISP. A copy of this order will be sent to the Chairman, BISP, Islamabad, for compliance. 8. These petitions are disposed of as per the terms stated above.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

68.Const. P. 3847/2022 (D.B.) Allah Warayo Junejo V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1535

Given that the Pakistan Post Office Department (PPOD), seemingly lacked the authority to change job nomenclatures, a power reserved for the Establishment Division; and considering the Assistant Attorney General's (AAG) acknowledgment of the 2007 up-gradation of relevant posts from BS-11 to BS-14, coupled with the Controller General of Accounts' (CGA), reclassification of Accounts Clerks as Auditors (BS-16) effective April 3, 2010, and referencing the CGA Ordinance 2001 and the Prime Minister's approval concerning the accounts cadre's administrative control. This matter is remitted to the Secretary, Establishment Division, for a decision on the subject issue within three months, ensuring no discrimination. A copy of this order shall be transmitted to the Secretary, Establishment Division, for immediate and timely compliance.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

69.Const. P. 3388/2019 (D.B.) Ashfaq Ahmed and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1525

This petition is not covered by the respondents' policy, and therefore, the petitioner's request for selection grade in BS-16 cannot be entertained at this stage, as "much water has already flown under the bridge." Consequently, this petition is not maintainable under Article 199 of the Constitution due to the doctrine of laches and is accordingly dismissed along with any pending applications.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

70.Const. P. 1982/2025 (D.B.) Syed Aslam Shah V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1526

This petition is not covered by the respondents' policy, and therefore, the petitioner's request for selection grade in BS-16 cannot be entertained at this stage, as "much water has already flown under the bridge." Consequently, this petition is not maintainable under Article 199 of the Constitution due to the doctrine of laches and is accordingly dismissed along with any pending applications.

Read more

Matter:-MEDICAL TREATMENT

---

71.Const. P. 810/2025 (D.B.) Syed Uzair Ali V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Topic: Deceased Son Quota

Constitutional Invalidation of Rule 11-A: Impact on Deceased Quota Appointments.

Read more

Matter:-Deceased Quota

---

72.H.C.A 39/2023 (D.B.) Ali Mushtaq and Others V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST ORDER

---

73.H.C.A 112/2024 (D.B.) Muhammad Saleem Mangi and Others V/S United Bank Limited & Another Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST ORDER

---

74.Const. P. 198/2023 (D.B.) Waqar Ali Jatoi V/S Federation of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1513

Federal Public Service Commission to issue transcript to all candidates appearing in the examinations.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

75.Const. P. 1475/2014 (D.B.) Noor Ul Hassan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1533

It is urged by the parties that the UBL paid the Petitioner PKR 605,112/- as termination dues, also known as a Golden Handshake, which the Petitioner acknowledged receiving on November 22, 2000. The Petitioner's employment with UBL ended due to retrenchment while he was a officer, consistent with the service rules then in effect. The Petitioner has since reached the age of superannuation, rendering the question of reversing his termination from service purely academic. This makes prayer clauses B to D redundant, as his service with UBL had already ended. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has previously ruled on similar cases in United Bank Limited v. Ahsan Akhtar (1998 SCMR 68), the Supreme Court held that writ petitions filed by aggrieved former employees against UBL are not maintainable. The Supreme Court also allowed Civil Appeal Nos. 1487 to 1528 of 1998 in United Bank Ltd. v. Shamim Ahmed Khan & others (PLD 1999 SC 990) on May 25, 1999, which concerned the compulsory retrenchment scheme to reduce staff strength. Therefore, the issue of retrenchment cannot be revisited at this stage. Regarding the implementation of the Federal Cabinet's decision in the Petitioner's case, this is an old issue, and too much time has passed to issue any directions. Finally, no direction can be issued for the Petitioner's absorption into any department with the Golden Handshake due to his reaching the superannuation age. Consequently, all issues raised in this petition are no longer relevant, leading to the dismissal of the current petition and any pending applications. This petition is dismissed accordingly.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

76.Const. P. 292/2023 (D.B.) Mukhtiar Ahmed Channo V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1667, 2025 SHC SUK 1679, 2025 SHC SUK 1680

The recruitment process pertaining to the year 2012 has been challenged after a lapse of 11 years. The petition, being hit by the doctrine of laches and not maintainable, is accordingly dismissed."

Read more

Matter:-Issue Appointment Order

---

77.Const. P. 1089/2023 (D.B.) Iftikhar Hussain Awan & others V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1688

This Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 is not competent to adjudicate disputed questions of fact. Petition dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Issue Appointment Order

---

78.Const. P. 478/2025 (D.B.) Ms. Sameena Gul V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST ORDER

---

79.Const. P. 838/2024 (D.B.) Muhammad Younis V/S Province of sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas

---

80.Spl.Cr.Bail 108/2025 (S.B.) ABID S/O MUHAMMAD HASAN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi

Bail granted on rule of consistency.

Read more

Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

81.Const. P. 1563/2022 (D.B.) Muhammad Shoaib ul Manan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1521

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. 5. Given PSM's precarious financial state, with over Rs. 100 billion in losses and Rs. 110 billion in liabilities, this Court deemed it inappropriate to grant the petitioners' financial benefits in terms of revised pay scales in 2011 and 2020. Consequently, this petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

82.Const. P. 373/2025 (D.B.) Aijaz Ahmed & others V/S PO Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1518, 2025 SHC LAR 1651

Sindh Government must regulate laws to control mob - rule strike calls by Advocate - code of conduct

Read more

Matter:-Harassment & Protection

---

83.Const. P. 4824/2022 (D.B.) Taufique Ahmed & Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1522

Probation is typically for new hires to assess their suitability. Successful completion leads to regularization. However, imposing a new probation period on long-serving contractual employees being regularized for the same role can be seen as unjustified, especially with satisfactory prior service. The law often recognizes continuous service for benefits, and a new probation could negate this. 5. Given that the petitioners have now been regularized and are no longer on probation, the argument for removing the probation condition is now academic, and the purpose of the petition has been served. This petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

84.Const. P. 6124/2022 (D.B.) Dr. Muhammad Amir Qureshi V/S Govt of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1523

The petitioner's claim for promotion, denied in 2010 and 2011, is subject to the doctrine of laches due to the delay in filing this petition on 06.10.2022. Without addressing the merits, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the respondent-university must consider the petitioner's candidature for any future promotion vacancy, in accordance with law and promotion policy, if the petitioner meets the eligibility criteria.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

85.Criminal Appeal 44/2024 (D.B.) Shafi Muhammad Sarki V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1475

Use of modern devices in the investigation of Narcotics Cases.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Above 7 Years)

---

86.Const. P. 1257/2021 (D.B.) Ghulam Bashir Bughio V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1534

It is well-settled law that the cancellation of the individual's promotions without proper, separate notices was/is unlawful. However, in the present case, the reasons provided for this cancellation, after the promotions' implementation with effect from 2018 with benefits, are vague and lack a legal basis. The claim that the Senate of the respondent university necessitated the recall of the promotion order of the petitioner contradicts the decision of the Court in the reinstatement of the former VC, as pointed out by the parties. The respondents failed to provide justifiable and lawful reasons for reconsidering and cancelling the petitioners' promotions already granted vide Notification dated, acting unilaterally without adhering to legal procedures. It is well-settled law that altering vested rights, including promotions, requires granting the affected parties a meaningful hearing, which the learned counsel conceded was not provided. In our view that separate proceedings ought to have been initiated before recalling the promotion order. Furthermore, legal precedents, including PLD 1992 SC 207, 2007 PLC (C.S) 364 and Capital Development Authority case 2022 SCMR 627, suggest that such a recall may not be permissible.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

87.Criminal Miscelleneous 740/2024 (S.B.) NAZAR MUHAMMAD JOKHIO V/S THE STATE & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1500

Points to consider when issuing directions to register FIR (for Ex-Officio Justice of Peace)

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

88.Const. P. 831/2025 (D.B.) Sajawal V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Matter:-APPOINTMENT

---

89.R.A (Civil Revision) 100/2019 (S.B.) Taj Muhammad Detho V/S Senior Civil Judge Ratodero and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1499

Rejection of Plaint Principle of Res judicata

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

90.Const. P. 2079/2021 (D.B.) Asghar Ali V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1531

It appears that following the Supreme Court's Order dated March 31, 2018, in Criminal Original Petition No. Crl. O.P. 15-K of 2016 (related to CA30-K of 2014 & Crl M.A. 37-K of 2017), and based on the recommendations of Provincial Selection Board No. I, as well as the approval of the Competent Authority/Chief Minister Sindh, the Specialists Cadre Doctors (BS-19) in the Health Department were granted proforma promotion from BS-19 to BS-20. This promotion was effective from the day immediately preceding their retirement from government service upon reaching the age of superannuation, as indicated against each name.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

91.J.M 15/2025 (S.B.) M/S PORSCHE MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA FZE V/S M/S PERFORMANCE AUTOMOTIVE (PVT.) LTD Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1515
Matter:-Foreign Arbitration Award

---

92.Const. P. 1401/2021 (D.B.) Tanveer Sultan V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1519

This Court expects the competent authority of the respondent to decide his pending departmental appeal on the issue of proforma promotion within three months, considering his seniority and eligibility for proforma promotion in BS-20 keeping view the decisions of the Supreme court in the cases of Secretary Schools of Education and others v. Rana Arshad Khan and others (2012 SCMR 126), Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of National Health Services v. Jahanzaib and others (2023 PLC (C.S.) 336), Homeo Dr. Asma Noureen Syed v. The Government of Punjab and others (2022 SCMR 1546), Dr. Syed Sabir Ali v. Government of Punjab through Secretary Health Punjab and others, (2008 SCMR 1535), Federation of Pakistan and others v. Amir Zaman Shinwari, Superintending Engineer, (2008 [5] SCMR 1138) and Dr. Muhammad Amjad v. Dr. Israr Ahmed, (2010 SCMR 1466). 8. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

93.Const. P. 3100/2021 (D.B.) Muhammad Nusrat and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1415

The Supreme Court in the case of Nazeer Ahmed Chkrani v Government of Pakistan (2004 SCMR 623), reiterating the principle from Pakistan International Airlines v Nasir Jamal Malik (2001 SCMR 934), established that a promoted employee cannot be demoted without being given a chance to be heard and present their case. In the Nazeer Ahmed Chkrani case, the petitioner was promoted to General Manager in 1995 and then demoted to Deputy General Manager in 1997 without any prior explanation sought regarding the circumstances of their promotion or their capability to hold the higher post. The demotion order also lacked any stated reasons for the Competent Authority's opinion that the promotion was wrongful. The Supreme Court, without delving into the merits of the case, held that the demotion violated the principles of natural justice ("no one should be condemned unheard"). Consequently, the petition was converted into an appeal and allowed, setting aside the Federal Service Tribunal's order and the departmental demotion order. The Supreme Court clarified that the Pakistan State Oil Company Limited remains free to initiate fresh action against the petitioner, provided they follow the correct legal procedure, and no order regarding costs was issued. In recent judgment of 2022, the Supreme Court has ruled that no decision be taken effacing the right of any person without first being informed of the case and affording an ample opportunity of defense, therefore judicial propriety demand that this matter needs to be taken care of by the competitive authority of respondents before taking adverse view until and unless there is strict compliance of the Supreme Court decisions.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

94.Const. P. 214/2023 (S.B.) Mst Mehwish Janvri V/S 3rd Additional District Jduge Larkana Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1456

Maintenance of minors and child justice approach.

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Order/ Family

---

95.Const. P. 1401/2021 (D.B.) Tanveer Sultan V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1416

This Court expects the competent authority of the respondent to decide his pending departmental appeal on the issue of his proforma promotion within three months, considering his seniority and eligibility for proforma promotion in BS-20, keeping view the decisions of the Supreme court in the cases of Secretary Schools of Education and others v. Rana Arshad Khan and others (2012 SCMR 126), Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of National Health Services v. Jahanzaib and others (2023 PLC (C.S.) 336), Homeo Dr. Asma Noureen Syed v. The Government of Punjab and others (2022 SCMR 1546), Dr. Syed Sabir Ali v. Government of Punjab through Secretary Health Punjab and others, (2008 SCMR 1535), Federation of Pakistan and others v. Amir Zaman Shinwari, Superintending Engineer, (2008 [5] SCMR 1138) and Dr. Muhammad Amjad v. Dr. Israr Ahmed, (2010 SCMR 1466). 8. This petition is disposed of accordingly.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

96.Const. P. 687/2023 (D.B.) Arif Manzoor V/S Federation of Pakistan & and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 1455

Constitutional jurisdiction cannot be invoked in service disputes involving non-statutory entities, as contractual employees lack an enforceable right to regularization absent a statutory foundation.

Read more

Matter:-Service

---

97.Const. P. 5884/2021 (D.B.) Jadam Gaju and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1424

It is well settled that while Article 199 allows High Court review of Cabinet decisions for reasons like lack of authority, constitutional violation, or bad faith, however, none of these apply here, as the petitioners have adequately been compensated by the decision of the Cabinet and this Court, does not see any reasonable justification to turn down the decision of the Cabinet approving the four-tier formula, therefore, the petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed because the Cabinet of Sindh has already provided sufficient relief through the four-tier formula, and the matter may not be prolonged further. 7. This petition is dismissed accordingly with the pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

98.Const. P. 2612/2021 (D.B.) Shah Jahan Khattak V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1422

This is a simple case of enforcement of the judgment of the Supreme Court in terms of Article 187(2) of the Constitution and to resolve the subject issue involved in this petition, this Court directs the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Sindh to fully implement the Supreme Court's ruling in Gul Hassan Jatoi the case (2016 SCMR 1254) in letter and spirit and take care of the seniority issues of Police Constables to Inspector Level within reasonable time. With this direction, the petition is now disposed of along with pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

99.Const. P. 1605/2021 (D.B.) Mst. Arshad Akhtar V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1423

Thus, we are inclined to entertain the request of the petitioner in the matter. On the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified by the decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in the cases of Dr. Syed Sabir Ali v. Government of Punjab through Secretary Health Punjab and others, (2008 SCMR 1535), Federation of Pakistan and others v. Amir Zaman Shinwari, Superintending Engineer, (2008 SCMR 1138) and Dr. Muhammad Amjad v. Dr. Israr Ahmed, (2010 SCMR 1466). 8. We for the aforesaid reasons, dispose of this constitutional petition and direct the competent authority of the official respondents to re-consider the case of the petitioner for proforma promotion in BS-19, after her retirement, by way of circulation within two months subject to the availability of vacancy in BPS-19 under the Recruitment Rules. As the petitioner has already retired on April 12, 2021, therefore, her proforma promotion will not affect the seniority of any person already in service and he would be entitled to his emoluments and pensionery benefits under the law.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

100.Const. P. 281/2022 (D.B.) Sarfraz Ali lund & othres V/S VC SMBBMU Larkana Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1586

Reasonable classification and discrimination. Respondents directed to take petitioners in service.

Read more

Matter:-RELEASING OF SALARY

---

101.Const. P. 6861/2017 (D.B.) Anwar Ul Haq V/S Federal Urdu Universtiy & Another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1420

Considering the case in hand, the respondent-university cannot modify the act of misconduct i.e. absence from duty without authorization into any of the minor penalties, hence the impugned order passed by the respondent-university dispensing with service of the petitioner due to unauthorized absence from duty was rightly passed and is now affirmed by this Court. 13. For the reasons stated, we find no error in the impugned order of the respondent-university. This petition is meritless and accordingly dismissed along with the pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

102.Const. P. 1123/2021 (D.B.) Rizwan Akbar Arain V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1419

Petitioner???s initial request for regularization with benefits from retrospect effect is not feasible at this stage to be discussed for the reason that petitioner earlier case has already been set at naught, the Petitioner now seeks this Court???s order for the release of the seniority list, as per the order dated September 2, 2013 in earlier round of litigation, and the same time-scale promotion (under SRO 1404(I)/2019) granted to his colleagues from January 31, 2020, subject to final outcome of the decision of the Islamabad High Court if not earlier released. Recognizing this issue, we direct the Respondents' competent authority to resolve his seniority and time-scale promotion issues within three months after hearing the Petitioner subject to final decision of the learned Islamabad High Court if not decided earlier. 8. This petition is disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

103.Const. P. 393/2024 (D.B.) Mst Saira Zareen Arain V/S Muhammad Aslam Arain and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1590

Service benefits of a deceased employee can only be availed by family of deceased. Group insurance and gratuity cannot be given to the nominee who is brother of employee, widow and minor daughters and parents of deceased employee.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

104.Const. P. 6139/2019 (D.B.) Prof: Asal Khan Tareen V/S N.I.C.V.D & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1436, 2025 SHC KHI 1451, 2025 SHC KHI 1454

the office staff of Satellite centre was undertaken by the petitioner does not mean that he was Head of Project to claim benefit of the minutes of the meeting. These all are disputed facts needs through examination which is to be done by the court of plenary jurisdiction and not under Article 199 of the Constitution. Besides as per statement of the respondents No. 1 & 2, there was final settlement with regard to service benefits of the petitioner, as such this case cannot stretch further, which is accordingly dismissed. 8. This petition is dismissed along with ending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

105.Const. P. 6139/2020 (D.B.) Mera Jan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1430

Since the petitioner has already been retired in 2020 and rotation of posting of the office staff of Satellite Centre was undertaken by the petitioner does not mean that he was Head of Project to claim benefit of the minutes of the meeting. These all are disputed facts needs thorough examination which is to be done by the court of plenary jurisdiction and not under Article 199 of the Constitution. Besides as per statement of the respondents No. 1 & 2, there was final settlement with regard to service benefits of the petitioner, as such this case cannot stretch further, which is accordingly dismissed. 7. This petition is dismissed along with pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-MISSING PERSONS

---

106.Const. P. 22/2021 (D.B.) M. Ameenuddin Ahmed Siddiqi & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1421

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, and without touching to the other issues as agitated by the petitioners on merit, we confine ourselves to the extent of recovery proceedings, initiated against the petitioners pursuance of withdrawal of the up-gradation benefits by the department, in terms of decision of the Supreme Court in the Shams-ur-Rehman case supra. This petition is hereby disposed of with the directive that, given the petitioners' service at a higher post and the subsequent withdrawal of the upgradation by Supreme Court order, no recovery proceedings shall be initiated against them, if not earlier acted upon. 8. This petition is disposed of on these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

107.Cr.Rev 90/2024 (D.B.) IMITIAZ AHMED S/O ABDUL HAMID V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1325
Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

108.Const. P. 1808/2020 (D.B.) Mst Razia Bibi V/S P.T.C.L & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1374, 2025 SHC KHI 1457

Pension declined. Benevolent Fund and Group Insurance allowed.

Read more

Matter:-INSURANCE

---

109.Const. P. 1449/2023 (D.B.) Tariq Hussain Laghari & Others V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1706

Though the petition is not barred by the principle of res judicata, however, on merits, the petitioners have failed to make out a case. Accordingly, the petition along with listed applications, if any, is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Issue Appointment Order

---

110.Const. P. 1519/2025 (D.B.) M/s Chirag Commodities V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

111.H.C.A 279/2023 (D.B.) UBL Insureres Limited V/S District Municipal Corporation Keamari Karachi Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST ORDER

---

112.Const. P. 890/2020 (D.B.) Dr. Ashraf Sadique V/S The Governor of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1418

Since the petitioner already received the Orderly Allowance, besides other officers also received such allowance as per the syndicate decision, recovery from the petitioner???s pension based on the governors' findings is unwarranted. On the aforesaid proposition, we are guided by the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Shams-ur-Rehman v Military Accountant General 2020 SCMR 188, whereby the Supreme Court by applying the principle of estoppel against the department from recovering the emoluments and benefits from the petitioner. 11. While pension law is not an absolute shield against recovery in cases of overpayment, losses, dues, or misconduct, in this specific case, as the Orderly Allowance had already been paid and acted upon, therefore, the Governor of Sindh's order regarding recovery is set aside, while the rest of the order is maintained. 12. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is partly allowed on these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

113.Const. P. 356/2024 (D.B.) Muhammad Ramzan & Others V/S Chuttal Bughio & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1503

12 (2) of CPC Fraud and misrepresentation

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

114.Const. P. 1450/2017 (D.B.) Khalid Ahmed Bablani V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1417

In such circumstances, we are of the view that both parties were appointed to unadvertised positions, and were accommodated on the post which were not put up for competitive process, as such the respondents can not curcmvent the legal procedure through their minuts of Departmental Seclection Committee (DSC) held on 10th and 30th August 2007 as the department had already received 20 applications and after scrutiny only 12 applications were shortlisted as per required qualifications, experience and domicile and all short listed candidates were called for interview and DSC interviewed the petitioner and respondent No.4 found suitable on their performance for the post of Deputy Direcotr (Electronics) but the situation is quite different when they were offered the different position i.e. Depurty Director (Instrumention) and conformity assessement rather the post of Deputy Director (Electronics) which is direct conflict with the recruitment rules, vide offer letter dated 12.09.2007, as such this Court is inclined to direct the Respondent-PSQCA to either regularize both their positions based on a similar principle of seniority in terms of ratio of the judgment of Supreme court in the case of Sarosh Haider Vs Muhammad Javed Chundrigar PLD 2014 SC 338 or re-advertise the relevant positions afresh within a reasonable timeframe. Consequently, the parties promotion and seniority claims in this context become irrelevant. 9. This petition stands disposed of in the aforsaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

115.II.A. 91/2024 (S.B.) Abdul Quddoos & Others Thr. Muhammad Arshan Nadeem V/S Khalid Yousuf Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1289

No privity of contract between the parties.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

116.Const. P. 260/2024 (D.B.) Ghulam Rasool V/S Province of Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas

---

117.Const. P. 1057/2024 (D.B.) Mst. Larib V/S F.O.P & others Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas

---

118.Cr.Acq.A. 20/2021 (D.B.) Syed Shafqat Shah V/S Khalid Hussain Mastoi & another Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1504

Appeal against acquittal and enhancement of sentence.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

119.R.A (Civil Revision) 84/2022 (S.B.) Pir Syed Mashooque Mohiuddin & others V/S Ali Raza Chandio & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1350

Article 30 of Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. Admission of facts.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

120.Const. P. 7229/2021 (D.B.) Capt. Rizwan Saif Khan Ghouri V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1341

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this court deems it proper to dispose of the captioned petition based on the observations made in paragraphs 5 to 13 of its prior order dated April 29, 2022, and preceeding paragraphs, for the reason that these observations served the broader public interest and aligned with Supreme Court decisions, and this order is in rem not personam therefore, the petitioner's retirement in 2022 did not render the legal principles outlined therein irrelevant. 5. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Chairman Port Qasim Authority for compliance within time.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

121.Criminal Appeal 35/2021 (D.B.) Karimdad Brohi & another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1214

Narcotics Appeal.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order of Trial Court(Life)

---

122.Const. P. 5953/2021 (D.B.) Khalid Hameed Hashmi V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1344

Recognizing that the Supreme Court has already settled this legal point through various pronouncements, and noting the Respondents' in-principle agreement to assign the Petitioner a proper posting according to the law and KMC rules within two weeks, this petition is disposed of in terms of the statements made by the learned AAG and the learned counsel for the KMC, without addressing the merits of the case, and is subject to the applicable laws and KMC rules.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

123.Const. P. 4283/2020 (D.B.) Hidayatullah V/S Chief Sect: & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1342

Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without touching the merits of the case, we find no justification to entertain this petition in 2025. It is significantly barred by laches, as the cause of action arose in 2011 with the impugned order dated 1.07.2011, yet the petitioner filed this petition in 2020, a delay of approximately nine years. Furthermore, no compelling reason to exercise our discretionary powers has been presented. Consequently, the Petition, being ill-conceived and barred by laches. This petition is dismissed because the Supreme Court of Pakistan has already dismissed an identical case through its judgment/order dated October 28, 2022, in CRP.No:510-K/2022 within Civil Petition No.1717-K of 2022.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

124.R.A (Civil Revision) 50/2025 (S.B.) Ali Sher Oghai & others V/S P.O Sindh & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1290

Rejection of plaint. Adjudication of fishing rights of fishermen in public waters.

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Judgement

---

125.Const. P. 4446/2021 (D.B.) Syed Farhat Abbas Zaidi V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1339

Considering the Petitioner's 2019 retirement and his inaction until now (2025), reversing the retirement notification is not possible. His failure to diligently pursue the case since 2019 means this court cannot order his retirement in BS-20 as he claims. He may still seek other legal remedies if he believes his rights were violated. 8. In light of the Petitioner's service history as detailed above, this Court is compelled to dismiss this petition and any associated pending applications.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

126.Judicial Companies Misc. 33/2024 (S.B.) U & I GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED V/S Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1335

Scheme of amalgamation sanctioned.

Read more

Matter:-MERGER

---

127.Const. P. 217/2025 (S.B.) Ruqqiya Lehar D/o Farooq Amin Jamal V/S Shayan Zakaria Chottani Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1217

The visitation schedule coined by the learned Family Court shall remain unchanged with the exception that the same will be implemented in letter and spirit from the time the minor turns 7 years of age.

Read more

Matter:-FAMILY MATTER

---

128.Const. P. 599/2022 (D.B.) Miss Seema Sanam V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1352, 2025 SHC SUK 1356, 2025 SHC SUK 1358

The petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis and is seeking regularisation. However, in the absence of any statutory backing, regularisation can not be granted. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Service Regularization

---

129.Const. P. 1114/2024 (D.B.) Mst Babli Devi V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1710

The principle that "he who seeks equity must do equity" is clearly attracted in the present case. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Pension

---

130.Const. P. 252/2025 (D.B.) Dilber Gopang & another V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1709

This Court is constrained to observe that such frivolous litigation burdens the judicial docket and diverts attention from genuine constitutional grievances required redress. Petition dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Construction

---

131.Const. P. 321/2025 (D.B.) Shah Muhammad Panhwar V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1571

Under Article 9 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the State is duty bound to protect the life and liberty of its citizens. Petition is disposed of.

Read more

Matter:-Restore the Police Picket

---

132.Const. P. 2523/2020 (D.B.) Muhammad Khalid Siddiqui V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1343

Given the petitioner's similar situation, having been appointed in 1986 and obtaining his B.Tech (Hons) in 2007, this petition is disposed of in line with the Supreme Court's decision on October 7, 2011, in Civil Appeal No. 241 of 2011, with all resulting benefits to be provided to the petitioner within three months.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

133.Const. P. 4209/2020 (D.B.) Asif Khursheed V/S Chairman Port Qasim Authority and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1425

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the request of the petitioner at this stage cannot be acceded to, after acceptance the post of security guard, therefore his request seems to be unreasonable, which is discareded as such this petition stands dismissed with pending applicaition(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

134.Const. P. 4596/2020 (D.B.) Muhammad Jam V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1347

The Supreme Court has ruled that proforma promotion is a remedy for individuals who miss promotion due to administrative errors or delays and subsequently retire. If a qualified and senior employee is denied timely consideration by a DPC or Selection Board due to administrative oversight, they have a legitimate expectation for proforma promotion with related benefits. This concept is rooted in the now-omitted Fundamental Rule 17, which allowed for back pay and allowances through proforma promotion for those wrongly prevented from higher posts through no fault of their own. Unjustified delays in proforma promotion cases cause hardship and unnecessary litigation. Competent authorities should establish strict timelines for proforma promotion committees to ensure swift and rational decisions, preventing retired employees from having to seek court intervention for their rightful benefits.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

135.Const. P. 3028/2020 (D.B.) Javed Iqbal & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1345

We also note the Supreme Court's order dated 03.06.2019 in C.P Nos 575-K to 578-K and 590-K to 594-K /2018, where Pakistan Steel withdrew its petitions because teaching staff had already been regularized, leading to the dismissal of the petitions. 9. Therefore, this petition is concluded following the Supreme Court of Pakistan's orders dated March 21, 2017, and June 3, 2019, in the previously mentioned cases. There will be no order regarding costs.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

136.Criminal Appeal 87/2024 (S.B.) Ghulam Mustafa @ Lanti Jakhrani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 1122

Section 311 P.P.C. Honour Killing Conviction.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order of Trial Court(Life)

---

137.Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 1129/2023 (D.B.) National Foods Limited V/S Collector of Customs, Karachi & another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act, 1969

2025 SHC KHI 1117

Exemption of duties and taxes on prefabricated buildings as Capital Goods under SRO 41 of 2009 read with Chapter 9917(2) of the Customs Tariff; HELD: YES

Read more

Matter:-CUSTOM MATTER

---

138.Const. P. 713/2024 (S.B.) Izat Gul and others V/S Wahab Uddin Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1118

???child-centered approach??? in judicial adjudication.

Read more

Matter:-FAMILY MATTER

---

139.Judicial Companies Misc. 38/2011 (S.B.) Banker Equity Ltd. V/S Hamid Textile Mills Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1230

Territorial jurisdiction for entertain petition under section 290 of Companies Ordinance.

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

140.Const. P. 1600/2025 (D.B.) M/s Sunrise Industries V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sale Tax Act 1990

2025 SHC KHI 1123

Remand by Chief Commissioner; if blacklisting order is set aside, then on the same analogy, the Suspension of sales tax registration cannot remain in field and must be set aside.

Read more

Matter:-SALES TAX REGISTRATION

---

141.Const. P. 1406/2024 (D.B.) Manzoor Ahmed V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1337

Considering the rulings of the Supreme Court in the aforementioned cases, we are of the considered opinion that the sole legal avenue available to Respondent No. 6 is to file a Review Petition before the Apex Court itself. Resorting to the Islamabad High Court or any other departmental forum is not permissible under the law as in the present case respondent No.6 attempted to circumvent the orders of this Court as well as Supreme Court based on opinion of the learned Advocate General Sindh and department concerned and they ought to have laid off their hands rather they could have advised the respondent No.6 to approach the Supreme Court for which his earlier Review Petition was dismissed, as such the stance of the respondent No.3 and 6 is discarded subject to final review of the Supreme Court if approach by the respondent No.6. Consequently, his attempts to seek favor from the department are not only unlawful but also contradict the principles established by the Supreme Court. Prima facie, all actions taken by the respondent department to accommodate Respondent No. 6 appear to be inconsistent with the law and the Supreme Court's decisions and, therefore, are not endorsed by this court. He shall be repatriated to his parent department forthwith, however, his seniority issue shall be decided in accordance with the Supreme Court decision on the subject issue. As such this petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-APPOINTMENT

---

142.Const. P. 1334/2020 (D.B.) Tahir Hussain Akhger V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1338

The legal right to the Petitioner's BPS-13 upgrade is disputed, especially since the Respondents say the 1994 rule did not apply to him, his work group has different rules, there's no higher Photographer job, his duties have not changed, he agreed to BPS-07, and the job is being ended due to abolishment of post, this Court cannot order the upgrade of the post which had already been abolished. Upgrading a job, especially one being ended, is a decision for the Ministry of Defence, and this Court may not interfere at this point. The people in charge at the Ministry can consider his request if the rules and policies allow it. So, this petition is dismissed based on these reasons.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

143.Const. P. 4419/2017 (D.B.) WAsif Qaavi Siddiqui V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

144.Const. P. 3170/2020 (D.B.) Shahzad Hussain and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1024

Cantonment Boards, operating under the Cantonments Act, 1924, and overseen by the ML&C Department, primarily govern their employees' service terms through the Pakistan Cantonment Servants Rules, 1954. While these rules detail appointments, they lack a specific regularization policy. However, government and Cabinet decisions, as well as the 2019 Director Conference directive and case law on the subject issue favoring permanent status for temporary employees with over 10 years of service with available posts, often guide regularization in public sector entities and could apply in the cantonment boards. It appears that the Petitioners have served over 12 years (since 2007-2008), were seemingly listed for regularization per Cabinet Sub-Committee decisions, meet the 10-year service criterion, and their advertised vacancies suggest available posts. 7. The petition also notes past regularization in other Cantonment Board regions. Therefore, the competent authority of the Respondents is directed to resolve this issue at their end as per policy and law, within three months by hearing the Petitioners and determining if they meet the government's regularization criteria. This petition is disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

145.Const. P. 2923/2020 (D.B.) Altaf Hussain V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1029

In the case of National Bank of Pakistan (Supra), the Supreme Court held in Paragraph 3 that the Respondent's unchallenged supersession in 2010 rendered his subsequent constitutional petition before the High Court time-barred (suffered from laches). Furthermore, the Respondent's claim for pro forma promotion lacked basis in the relevant service rules. Considering his retirement and receipt of all due benefits, the Supreme Court found the High Court's intervention unsustainable under the relevant law and rules governing the Bank's employees. Consequently, the petition was converted into an appeal, allowed, and the Peshawar High Court's judgment was set aside.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

146.Const. P. 5893/2016 (D.B.) Syed Salman Hasan and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1025

Learned AAG submitted that the petitioners' appointments are illegal, contravening KoFHA's 1988 Regulations and 1982 Ordinance. The AAG refuted allegations against the former Secretary, noting his retirement on March 25, 2017. Regarding the former MD KoFHA's appointment, it was asserted to be improper and against procedure, resulting in a stayed removal directive. The AAG maintained the petitioners' appointments violated KoFHA regulations, the Ordinance, and federal policy, justifying the Ministry's actions as the supervisory authority. The petitioners' claims were argued to be unfounded in KoFHA's rules, and the principle of locus poenitentiae was inapplicable due to the initial illegality of the appointments in KoFHA. Fundamental rights claims were dismissed due to the illegal appointments. The AAG stated the Ministry correctly conveyed policy to the former MD, who then illegally appointed the petitioners. Consequently, they cannot be considered regular employees. The actions of Respondent No. 2 were defended as compliant with regulations, and no violation of apex court rulings by Respondent No. 1 occurred. The petitioners' appointments are deemed void from inception due to legal violations. The AAG concluded by stating that the petitioners concealed facts and requested the petition's dismissal with costs on behalf of the Respondent ministry. 5. The stance of the respondent/4 KoFHA is that KoFHA, an autonomous body under the Ministry operating under the 1982 Ordinance and 1988 Regulations, acknowledges the petitioners' appointments followed due process. While Petitioner No. 1's (BPS-17) confirmation is pending Board reconstitution, Petitioners No. 2-5 (BPS-16) have completed probation and deserved confirmation.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

147.Const. P. 1279/2025 (D.B.) Dost Muhammad Laghari and Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan (CP dismissed - Cause apprehended in future - no quo warranto)

2025 SHC KHI 860

A case for quo warranto cannot be based on the occurrence of a future event apprehended by the petitioner to arise under Article 199(1)(b)(ii) of the 1973 Constitution.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

148.Const. P. 6241/2018 (D.B.) Shakil Ahmed Khan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

The respondent department submitted that the Petitioner's ad-hoc appointment since 1988, which has not been regularized, does not confer automatic promotion rights like those of permanent employees. Promotion typically requires specific qualifications, and the Petitioner lacks a relevant certificate, as highlighted. The provided seniority list is outdated and allegedly irregular, rendering it unreliable for promotion claims. Even if a junior's promotion was illegal, it does not ensure the Petitioner's promotion. Claims of delayed BS-14 promotion are weakened by the Petitioner's ad-hoc status and lack of certification. The "rule of parity" argument is also undermined by these factors. Consequently, the Petitioner's automatic entitlement to promotion is unlikely. Regularization and meeting the qualifications for the higher post are necessary prerequisites and as such this petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

149.Const. P. 816/2015 (D.B.) Zameer Ahmed Khan V/S Province Of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1027

The pivotal question is whether the Petitioner's M.Ed. and M.A. exceeded the necessary qualifications for his JST role when he earned them (1988/89) and for his subsequent HST promotion. If these degrees were mandatory, he seems to be ineligible for advance increments, which were meant for extra qualifications. His entitlement hinges on the Recruitment Rules in effect at the time he obtained the degrees. Despite the scheme's termination in 2001, any previously earned rights may still be valid. This aspect shall be scrutinized by the respondent department after hearing th petitioner.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

150.Const. P. 5570/2017 (D.B.) Amjad Ali Pechuho V/S N.B.P and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1026

The Supreme Court's 2021 judgment declared the Sacked Employees Ordinance 2009 and the Act 2010 unconstitutional, rendering the Petitioner's reinstatement under the Ordinance and his higher grade claim under the Act legally questionable. This revives his original grievance regarding his 1996 termination as Officer Grade-III, weakening the Bank's defenses of a settled matter, estoppel, and laches. The legality of the 1996 termination and the fairness of subsequent proceedings, particularly the Enquiry Officer's report (no proof of willful absence), became the central point. The ultra vires declaration significantly strengthens the Petitioner's case on merit. Therefore, the Bank's competent authority is directed to reconsider its decision after hearing the Petitioner within three months, focusing on the legality of the 1996 termination order and subsequent reinstatement on a lower grade. If the termination was illegal, reinstatement to his 1996 position should be considered strictly in accordance with the law and policy of the bank. However, the observation recorded hereinabove is tentative, subject to the final decision of the respondent bank on the merits of the case. 7. This petition is disposed of accordingly.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

151.E.P 15/2024 (S.B.) Adeel Ahmed V/S Election Commission of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1182

Affidavit of service filed after period of 45 days did not cure non-compliance of section 144(2)(c) of Election Act. Petition rejected under section 145(1) of the Act.

Read more

Matter:-ELECTION MATTER

---

152.Const. P. 1379/2022 (D.B.) Naib Hussain Shanbani V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1683

Since the petitioner is no longer in service, the question of regularization does not arise. The petition being devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed..

Read more

Matter:-Service Regularization

---

153.E.P 24/2024 (S.B.) Tariq Hussain s/o Ghulam Sarwar V/S Election Commission of Pakistan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1280

Affidavit of service beyond limitation. Petition rejected.

Read more

Matter:-ELECTION MATTER

---

154.II.A. 159/2019 (S.B.) Abdul Waheed Khan Thr. Attorney Obaid Bin Raheem V/S Khush Muhammad Bhutto Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 878

Equitable principles under Section 53-A Transfer of Property Act 1882

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

155.Const. P. 4387/2019 (D.B.) Fahad Faruqi V/S Governor of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-SERVICE

---

156.Const. P. 162/2022 (S.B.) Muhammad Alim Shar V/S Shah Nawaz & Ors Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 783

Order XXIII CPC conditional withdrawal of suit.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

157.Const. P. 7448/2019 (D.B.) Mansoor Umer Khanzada & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1072

The current legal issues emphasize that achieving equal benefits and seniority for these regularized employees of SIDA requires clear administrative decisions. While the Act 2013 facilitated their regularization only, fully integrating them into the civil service structure, particularly given SIDA employees' unique position, necessitates further clarification and implementation. The purpose of this petition is to determine whether SIDA employees can be treated equally with other government employees regarding service benefits and the budgetary allocation for their positions. 10. Therefore, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the Chief Secretary Sindh to convene a meeting coordinated by the Head of SIDA and Irrigation department Government of Sindh, within three months to address this discrepancy and resolve the subject issue at their end on administrative side.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

158.Const. P. 4517/2019 (D.B.) Dr. Komal Jan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1071

After extensive arguments, both sides reached a consensus to resolve the case with the understanding that Dr. Komal Jan's prior service at Bibi Aseefa Dental College, Larkana, commencing on December 1, 2016, and her subsequent transfer to DUHS on February 7, 2019, as a Lecturer BPS-18, will be taken into account when calculating her pension benefits after her retirement from service. Finding this proposal fair and consistent with the Civil Services Regulations, this court accepts it. Consequently, this petition is hereby disposed of according to the terms outlined above.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

159.Const. P. 981/2020 (D.B.) Ms. Faizah Aleem V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1073

If this is the position of the case, the petitioner can approach the civil court, as the Civil courts are the primary forum for resolving disputes arising from contracts, including employment contracts. They have the jurisdiction to examine the terms of the agreement, hear evidence, and award remedies for breach of contract. The petitioner's claim falls squarely within the purview of civil courts, which can pass appropriate order on the subject matter if deemed the impugned order unlawful, as the termination of the contract occurred on 10.02.2020, whereas the subject petition was filed two days after such termination order, though petitioner claims not received. This dispute can also be decided by the competent court as the lis could be in continuation of the proceedings. 8. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, and without touching the merits of the case, this petition is dismissed, allowing the petitioner to seek resolution for her grievances through a court with full jurisdiction, in accordance with the law, if she chooses to do so.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

160.Const. P. 4159/2019 (D.B.) Zuryaman V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1075

If this is the position of the case, the petitioner can approach the civil court, as the Civil courts are the primary forum for resolving disputes arising from contracts, including employment contracts. They have the jurisdiction to examine the terms of the agreement, hear evidence, and award remedies for breach of contract. The petitioner's claim involving a monetary fine and forfeiture of benefits falls squarely within the purview of civil courts, which can order the recovery of such amounts if deemed unlawful, as the termination of the contract occurred before the Act 2023. 9. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, this petition is dismissed, allowing the petitioner to seek resolution for his grievances through a court with full jurisdiction, in accordance with the law, if he chooses to do so.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

161.Const. P. 6571/2020 (D.B.) Masood Ahmed & Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1074

Primarily the promotion in next rank is to be made based on senior cum fitness coupled with availability of vacancy under the Recruitment Rules and if those rules do not equate BPS-16 positions to BPS-17, the same cannot be granted based solely on possessing specific Second-Division degrees in Agriculture, Civil, or Mechanical Engineering, or an MSc in Agriculture from a recognized university. However, it is for the respondent department to deal with the service issues of the employees in accordance with law and without discrimination. 7. In view of the aforesaid legal position of the case, this petition is dismissed with pending application(s). JUDGE

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

162.Const. P. 2922/2024 (D.B.) Saleem Akhtar Siddiqi V/S Sultan Ahmed Qureshi & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Resjudicata (Petition dismissed)

2025 SHC KHI 782

Judgment-Debtor Tenant's Petition dismissed. Still the Executing Court cannot attach the pension account of the alleged Government Officer/Advocate in execution proceedings arising from the enforcement of the recovery of arrears of rent from the alleged tenant-judgment-debtor

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST ORDER OF CIVIL REVISION (CR)

---

163.Const. P. 765/2024 (D.B.) Dr. Mehboob Ali V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas 2025 SHC MPK 784

Ensuring equal treatment and Merit-Based Regularization: Upholding legislative intent and Constitutional mandates for contractual Doctors under the Doctors Regularization Act, 2018.

Read more

---

164.Const. P. 6134/2024 (D.B.) Dr. Muhammad Suleman V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973, Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion andTransfer) Rules,1974

2025 SHC KHI 762

Promotion set-aside.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

165.Const. P. 63/2024 (D.B.) Haji Muhammad Umer Bughio V/S POS & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas 2025 SHC MPK 1507, 2025 SHC MPK 1695

---

166.Const. P. 8465/2017 (D.B.) SBP and Ors V/S Waseem Ahmed and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973, Civil Procedure Code CPC

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

167.Const. P. 131/2025 (D.B.) Syed Muhammad Alam Shah V/S PO sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 912

Ghotki-Kandhkot Bridge Development Project falls in the Policy making domain of Executive. This Court cannot interfere in policy matters under Writ Jurisdiction.

Read more

Matter:-CONSTRUCTION

---

168.Const. P. 8521/2017 (D.B.) Abid Hussain V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1076

While the Respondents have consistently alleged the submission of a tampered Matric Science certificate through three inquiries, their counsel conceded that the verification report does not specify the group. Although the Respondents maintained that the SSC-II result is genuine as per board???s verification later 15.02.2017, they allege that the Petitioner altered the group from Science to General. The Petitioner has consistently stated his qualifications as Matric (General Group, 2009) and Intermediate (Humanities, 2011), denying any tampering of his Matriculation Certificate. He explained that he informed the authorities and presented his original General Group certificates when asked to produce a Science certificate. He also pointed to previous official records from 2012 and 2013 that acknowledged his Matric (General Group) qualification. Given the Larkana Board's verification of the Petitioner's SSC-II results as authentic, and the lack of clarity in the verification report regarding the specific group at the time of application, this court sees no need for further action. This matter has been pending since 2013 without significant progress, and the inquiry proceedings have already been judicially reviewed by this Court. As the Petitioner's SSC-II results are verified and found genuine by the BISE Larkana, the Respondents should now allow him to continue his employment based on this Matric Certificate. The remaining issue of the specific group needs to be resolved by the head of the department of the respondents, considering the verification report from the Larkana Board. The outstanding issues as agitated shall also be resolved in the intervening period within three months. 6. This petition is therefore disposed of under the aforementioned terms, along with any pending applications.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

169.Const. P. 3583/2019 (D.B.) Ch: Muhammad Shafiq Ashgar & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1045

Determining the accurate amount of interest on the provident fund, claimed by the petitioners to be between PKR 4,000,000 and 4,500,000, necessitates the recording of evidence, a process that falls under the purview of a court with ordinary jurisdiction. 7. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, we see no valid reason to continue with this petition. It is therefore dismissed, along with all pending applications. The petitioners are at liberty to pursue their claims for outstanding dues through a competent court of law.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

170.Const. P. 4/2019 (D.B.) Muhammad Attaullah & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1047

Having considered the legal precedents, we are of the opinion that the Petitioners' situation falls under the principle of Master and Servant. It is a well-established legal principle that a contractual employee does not possess a fundamental or acquired right to remain in their contractual position or to demand an extension or regularization of their service. Furthermore, it is settled law that courts generally avoid interfering with the policy-making authority of the Executive branch, unless it is demonstrated that such policies have violated the fundamental rights of citizens, which is not the situation presented in this case.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

171.Const. P. 1935/2019 (D.B.) Shahid Rasool Memon & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1044

It may be noted that although the Colleges in question are permanent and are required to have permanent status, the staff working therein is required to have permanent status. However, the respondents have created the relationship between the petitioners and Hadeed Welfare Trust as master and servant to avoid the regularization of their long service, as the issue has already been set at naught by the judgment rendered by this Court in Hafeez Junejo???s case has been implemented in its letter and spirit. Additionally, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has already taken care of the issue of regularization of service of teaching staff in the aforesaid cases; as such, no further deliberation is required on our part. 9. Based on our scrutinizing of the record, we are left in no manner of doubt that the respondents are causing discriminatory treatment with the petitioners, which is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which is a fundamental right and this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution can protect the fundamental rights of the citizens including the petitioners in service-related issues. 10. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in terms of orders dated 21.03.2017 and 03.06.2019 passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid matters, with no order as costs.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

172.Const. P. 5691/2019 (D.B.) Sharjeel Akhtar and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1052

This Court recognizes similar work, responsibilities, and standing between High Court establishment and district judiciary employees, despite different tiers, as both contribute to provincial justice administration. The High Court's administrative control under Article 203 of the constitution supports equal treatment under the "rule of parity." This applies to pay scales (equal pay for equivalent grades), standardized allowances (Judicial and Utility, with High Court percentage revisions extending to the district judiciary), other benefits (medical, housing, etc.), and pension benefits (if allowances are pensionable for High Court employees, the same should apply to the district judiciary). The rule of parity mandates equal treatment for similarly situated groups without discrimination in terms of Article 25 of the Constitution. The Government of Sindh is under its obligation to treat the employees of entire judiciary equally, so far as their perks and privileges are concerned without discrimination.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

173.Const. P. 317/2025 (D.B.) Arsalan Sahito V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1587

A mere passing score in the written examination does not, in itself, confer a vested right to appointment. Petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Recruitment

---

174.Const. P. 2306/2024 (D.B.) Syed Usman Ali Shah V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1684

It is settled principle of law that the writ of quo warranto is not to be issued as a matter of course. Court to test bona fide of relator to see if he has come in the Court with clean hands. Petition dismised.

Read more

Matter:-Inquiry

---

175.II.A. 77/2023 (S.B.) Iqbal Ahmed Siddiqui S/o Maudood Ahmed Siddiqui V/S Khalid Maudood Siddiqui and Another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 731

Ingredients of benami transaction.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

176.Const. P. 1915/2019 (D.B.) Dr. Asha Bai V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1037

The petitioner's regularization case, ongoing since 2015 (CP 2187/2015), was sent for reconsideration in 2018, but a committee found her unsuitable based on subjective criteria. While challenging this as arbitrary, this court notes it cannot reassess her now, especially with another candidate already working on the post. In terms of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Asif Hassan v Sabir Hussain, 2019 SCMR 1720, this court typically does not interfere with the expert committee's subjective evaluations under Article 199. It is the competent authority's prerogative to assess candidates, and this court cannot substitute its judgment if the chosen candidate is qualified and eligible, a principle supported by the Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Ashraf Sangri v. Federation of Pakistan and others (2014 SCMR 157). 6. This petition is dismissed as it seeks to reopen a reassessment already conducted in previous litigation, rendering it not maintainable at this stage. All pending applications are also dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

177.Const. P. 7657/2018 (D.B.) Muhammad Irshad V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1038

The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that promotion is not an inherent right of a civil or public servant, and therefore, cannot be demanded as such. However, in this specific instance, the petitioner was initially appointed as a Superintendent, Communication BS-16 in the Solid Waste Management Board (SWMB) of the Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC) in 1991. Subsequently, his position was re-designated as Assistant Executive Engineer BS-17 following his B.Tech (Hons) qualification, as per an order dated March 8, 2023. Nevertheless, the petitioner's promotion prospects are contingent upon the legal precedent established in the case of Moula Bux Shaikh (2018 SCMR 2098), and a similar matter is currently under consideration by the Supreme Court. Consequently, this Court cannot examine the petitioner's eligibility for promotion to BS-18 based on his B.Tech degree, as the Supreme Court has already provided a definitive ruling on this matter.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

178.Const. P. 8456/2019 (D.B.) Farrukh Imran and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1041

This issue as raised firstly could be resolved by the competent authority of PSO at their end within three months from the date of receipt this order and if the respondent company decide the cases of the petitioners on the same analogy as put forward by the petitioners then the matter shall be over once for all, however if the decision goes against the petitioners they may recourse to the legal remedies as provided under the law, however the petitioners cannot be non-suited based non-statutory rules of service in terms of Supreme Court decision. This petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

179.Const. P. 1802/2019 (D.B.) Ghulam Hussain Khokhar and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1032

In Registrar, Supreme Court of Pakistan v. Qazi Wali Muhammad (1997 SCMR 141), the Supreme Court reiterated its stance from Government of Punjab v. Mubarik Ali Khan (PLD 1993 SC 375). In Mubarik Ali Khan, case the Court held that High Court employees are not civil servants under the Civil Servants Act because the legislature has no role in determining their terms and conditions, ensuring judicial independence as per the Constitution. The Court in Qazi Wali Muhammad noted this exclusion. Applying this analogy, the Sindh High Court suggests treating High Court establishment employees and the Advocate General's Office employees similarly in terms of their connection to the administration of justice. While Advocate General's Office employees are civil servants (the office being constitutional under Article 140), their function is to assist the High Court. However, this view is tentative, based on the Sindh High Court's earlier decision in Amanullah Khan Yousufzai (allowing judicial allowance to the Advocate General's Office). The Sindh High Court has not differentiated between these two sets of employees while granting the simmiler relief, unless the Supreme Court overturns the Amanullah Khan Yousufzai decision.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

180.Const. P. 8068/2019 (D.B.) Ajay Kumar Sehwani V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1066

This court orders a reassessment of the petitioners' credentials and eligibility for their current posts by a committee headed by the Chief Secretary. This reassessment should include degree verification and the fulfillment of other codal formalities. A decision will be made within three months after hearing the petitioners. This petition is disposed of in line with the Supreme Court's judgment in Muhammad Suleiman Vs Chief Secretary, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2023 SCMR 1932.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

181.Const. P. 1768/2025 (D.B.) Faiz Muhammad Palari V/S Govt of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1053

This Court finds the present petition suitable for immediate dismissal ("in limine"). The reasons are that the Supreme Court is already addressing almost identical issues in an appeal connected to Civil Petition No. (Nill) of 2024, and the petitioner has not offered any fresh point of view, except that the petitioner has established an unauthorized Cattle Piri (market) for Eid-ul-Adha sacrificial animals, and the subject issue is under consideration before the Assistant Commissioner concerned. In such a scenario, the Assistant Commissioner needs to first handle the petitioner's local government application, annexed with the memo of petition regarding this issue. Seeking both certiorari and mandamus relief at this stage is premature because an alternative legal remedy is still available. Constitutional Courts intervene only when all other options are exhausted, which is not the situation here. Moreover, there is no final government decision for this court to review, and Article 199 of the constitution does not apply to disputes involving private parties. Since the Supreme Court is already considering the requested relief in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 5731 of 2024 (within the same Civil Petition), and a restraining order is operating, this court cannot entertain the current petition.

Read more

Matter:-CATTLE FARM

---

182.Const. P. 5982/2019 (D.B.) Jalil ur Rehman Khonbati V/S PSO Co. Ltd and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1033

For the reasons stated, the court finds that a "Master and Servant" relationship exists between the Petitioner and the Respondent-Authority. Consequently, the petitioner's grievance pertains to the terms and conditions of service, which cannot be enforced through a Writ Petition, especially since the Service Rules involved are non-statutory and are considered internal instructions for the Respondent-Company's employee management. This view aligns with the principles established by the Supreme Court in Shafique Ahmed Khan and others v. NESCOM through Chairman Islamabad and others (PLD 2016 SC 377) and Muhammad Zaman etc. v. Government of Pakistan through Secretary, Finance Division (Regulation Wing), Islamabad (2017 SCMR 571), which differentiate between statutory and non-statutory service rules in the context of writ jurisdiction.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

183.Const. P. 6761/2019 (D.B.) Khetaram & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1039

Essentially, the petitioners are requesting the Court to direct the government of Sindh to elevate the official standing of their specific jobs within the government's structure. This reclassification would result in higher pay and possibly improved benefits, bringing them in line with what other Sindh Government employees in comparable roles earn. They feel their current job levels and salaries do not adequately acknowledge their years of service and the nature of their duties relative to others. 7. This Court acknowledges that the final decision on upgrading these positions is a policy matter for the relevant government authority and as such decline to interfere in the same, accordingly the petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

184.J.M -245/2024 (S.B.) WHITE CRYSTALS LIMITED V/S INFRASTRUCTURE GROWTH CAPITAL FUND GEN PARTNER LTD Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 727

Interpretation of Section 3 of the Recognition of Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act 2011 in terms of the jurisdiction of a court to enforce a foreign arbitral award where the parties to the arbitration do not reside with the jurisdiction of the Court.

Read more

Matter:-ARBITRATION

---

185.R.A (Civil Revision) 339/2023 (S.B.) Ali Mihammad through LRS V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 695

Jurisdictional bounds of Civil Courts: Revenue remedies must precede Judicial Intervention. Revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 C.P.C: A limited scope of intervention against concurrent findings.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

186.R.A (Civil Revision) 190/2022 (S.B.) Srichand V/S Dileep Kumar Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1570

Whether the suit ultimately succeeds or fails is a matter to be determined through adjudication, not at the threshold through a mechanical application of Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Civil Revision Application is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

187.Const. P. 180/2022 (S.B.) Rana Muddasir Ali Rajput Through Attorney V/S Additional District Judge Moro & another Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1584

It is settled principle of law that articles given in the dowry by the parents of the bride are not gift for a husband or his family but are entrusted of the bride to her personal use and benefit. Petition is disposed of.

Read more

Matter:-Family Matter

---

188.Const. P. 6833/2019 (D.B.) Abdul Qadir Shaikh and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1060

Both Fida Hussain v. The Secretary, Kashmir Affairs and Northern Affairs Division, Islamabad (PLD 1995 SC 701) and Maula Bux Shaikh case, supra, confirmed the government's authority to decide promotion qualification sufficiency. However, key questions remain: Can a promotion policy violating the PEC Act or other laws (potentially leading to criminal liability) be valid? And does preventing an Executive Engineer (BS-18) from performing their professional duties create discriminatory classes within the same cadre, violating Article 25 of the Constitution? The issue of whether a promotion policy violates the PEC Act or creates discriminatory classes within the same cadre is valid is currently pending adjudication before the Supreme Court in the case of Ghulam Abbas Soomro vs The Province of Sindh, etc. (Civil Appeal No. 84-K of 2023). 11. Given the pending Supreme Court case (Ghulam Abbas Soomro), this petition is disposed of based on the existing Supreme Court dicta. The respondent department will revive the petitioners' case if the Ghulam Abbas Soomro decision warrants it, subject to the eligibility of the petitioners under the recruitment rules for proforma promotion to the next rank.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

189.Const. P. 469/2024 (S.B.) Aijaz Ali Chandio & Others V/S Mst. Shamul Chandio & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 778

Laws regulating "Adoption of Children"

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Order/ Succession

---

190.Const. P. 5965/2019 (D.B.) Muhammad Mithal V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1061

The term "absorption" lacks definition in the 1973 Act and its Rules, 1974, but Rule 9-A (1974) governs surplus employee transfers to suitable posts (ideally equivalent grade), this proposition is supported by the decision of the Supreme Court. According to Paragraph 116 of the 2013 SCMR 1752 judgment, clarified that Rule 9-A governs the transfer of surplus employees (due to post abolition or government takeover of their organization) to suitable government posts, provided they meet the qualifications for an equivalent or comparable scale. Seniority in the new cadre starts from the appointment date. 5. The Petitioner has sought his original Accountant BS-15 benefits and upgrades, consistent with Supreme Court rulings. This court accept the plea of the petitioner and direct the respondent's competent authority to reconsider its decision within three months after hearing the Petitioner, in line with those rulings as discussed supra and observation recorded hereinabove. 6. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

191.Const. P. 5497/2019 (D.B.) Manzoor Ahmed Jokhio V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1062

The provided rule and Supreme Court precedents establish a civil servant's entitlement to pro-forma promotion. The Supreme Court in Secretary Schools of Education v. Rana Arshad Khan (2012 SCMR 126) granted proforma promotion to retirees due to unjustifiable departmental delays in their promotion process before retirement. Similarly, Federation of Pakistan v. Jahanzaib (2023 PLC (C.S.) 336) held that proforma promotion is applicable when an administrative oversight delays consideration for promotion until after retirement. Furthermore, in Homeo Dr. Asma Noureen Syed v. The Government of Punjab (2022 SCMR 1546), the Supreme Court remanded a case back to the Service Tribunal for fresh consideration of proforma promotion for a retired civil servant. These judgments underscore that employees should not suffer due to departmental failings regarding timely promotion consideration.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

192.Const. P. 6407/2019 (D.B.) Amber Iqbal V/S The Registrar, High Court of SINdh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1057

For judicial positions specifically, a clean record and thorough background checks are crucial. While a conviction for a serious offense would disqualify a candidate, mere unproven involvement in an issue might not automatically lead to the rejection of their application. 11. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, and without commenting on the legal validity of the order dated February 13, 2017, this petition is disposed of with the understanding that the petitioner is free to apply for future appointments or employment, provided she possesses the genuine academic qualifications required for any such future position.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

193.Const. P. 1085/2017 (D.B.) Dr. Niaz Ali Abbasi and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1056

In View of the foregoing, the provincial government recommended the petitioners for PAS induction in 2014 and 2015, yet the Establishment Secretary took no action under the prevailing rules, citing ongoing consultations with the FPSC, significant time passed in pursuing the case by the petitioners, and one of the petitioner retired during the proceedings. The subsequent issuance of SRO 274(I)/2021 by the FPSC further complicated the petitioners' position due to inaction on the part of respondent No.1 for the reasons best known to him, which are obvious, with continued inaction being viewed unfavorably regarding PMS/PCS officers' PAS induction. Consequently, this court is left with no option but to direct the Establishment Secretary to immediately act on the provincial government's recommendations for PMS/PCS officers' PAS induction if they meet the eligibility criteria for recommendation through the competitive process under the law without any sort of delay. 10. This petition is thus disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

194.Const. P. 6242/2018 (D.B.) Raheel Mehtab V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1055

The preceding analysis constrains the conclusion that NADRA's Regulations are non-statutory. Although the petitioner proceeded against the statutory Rules of 1973, their adoption under Regulation 23 of the non-statutory Regulations gives them a non-statutory status in this context. Consequently, this constitutional petition is not maintainable under Article 199 of the Constitution more particularly in terms of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Maj. (Retd.) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas's case supra and is therefore, dismissed with the pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

195.Const. P. 2636/2009 (D.B.) P.N.S.C. V/S FEd of Pakistan & Orsd Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1054

The Supreme Court in Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited vs. President of Pakistan (2020 SCMR 242) followed its precedent set in Peshawar Electric Supply Company Ltd. v. Wafaqi Mohtasib, supra. Quoting the PESCO case, the Court reiterated that the Wafaqi Mohtasib lacks jurisdiction under Article 9 of The Order, 1983, to entertain complaints regarding appointments or recommend appointments by relaxing age limits in public sector companies, as these are executive functions. Consequently, the Supreme Court in the Sui Northern case held that the Wafaqi Mohtasib did not have jurisdiction to hear Respondent No.3's case against the Petitioner Company, and the Lahore High Court erred in dismissing the Writ Petition.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

196.Const. P. 2549/2011 (D.B.) Muhammad Luqman Khoso and another V/S Syed Nazar Hussain Shah Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 69

Inherent Powers of the Civil Court.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

197.Const. P. 6240/2018 (D.B.) Muhammad Bakhtiar Ahmed V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1065

The core issue is whether proceedings under the statutory Rules of 1973 constitute statutory intervention, allowing a writ petition based on the Pakistan Defence Officers??? Housing Authority case (2013 SCMR 1707). That case held that statutory proceedings override non-statutory rules. Here, the Supreme Court found statutory intervention because proceedings against corporation employees were initiated under the Removal from Service Ordinance, 2000. However, the present petitioner was proceeded against under the Rules of 1973, which inherently apply only to civil servants, not NADRA employees. These rules were applied to the petitioner solely through adoption in NADRA's non-statutory Regulation 23. Statutory intervention would only exist if the Rules of 1973 directly applied to NADRA employees, independent of NADRA's adoption. Since their application is solely via non-statutory regulations, they do not gain a superior statutory status, therefore, assertion of the learned counsel for the petitioner is misconceived and discarded.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

198.Const. P. 6405/2018 (D.B.) Jawed Ahmed V/S Chief Sect: & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1064

Laches, an equitable defense, bars relief for unreasonable delay that prejudices the opponent. Unlike strict limitations, its application depends on case facts and fairness. The Supreme Court in Farzand Raza Naqvi case 2004 SCMR 400) held that delay can bar writ petitions, but not if equitable, the petitioner was not indolent, and relief is just. Laches is less impactful for recurring issues, as past delay might not preclude action on current occurrences. The AAG argued that 2013-2018 (now 2025) is laches, countered by petitioners citing timely prior cases. 8. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without touching the merits of the case, we find no justification to entertain this petition in 2025. It is significantly barred by laches, as the cause of action arose in 2013 with the impugned order, yet the petitioner filed this petition in 2018, a delay of approximately five years. Furthermore, no compelling reason to exercise our discretionary powers has been presented. Consequently, the Petition, being ill-conceived and barred by laches, is hereby dismissed with pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

199.Const. P. 8209/2018 (D.B.) Syed Wahid Ali & Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1427

The Supreme Court also emphasizes that regularization is a policy decision within the executive???s purview and generally beyond judicial interference. Courts can review policies only if they violate constitutional rights. The concept of institutional autonomy, essential for effective decision-making, supports non-interference in policy matters. This autonomy is vital for public institutions to safeguard public interest and promote democratic values, including academic freedom. 10. This Court has determined that The petitioners cannot ask for regularization of their service through constitutional petitions under Article 199 of the Constitution, however, it is for the respondent???s competent authority to consider their case in terms of their policy, if any, without discrimination within reasonable time.

Read more

Matter:-REGULARIZATION

---

200.Const. P. 561/2018 (D.B.) Muhammad Yousuf Malik & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1063

As per the Syed Munawar Ali case (2016 SCMR 859), post-upgradation needs restructuring, reform, or public interest; it is post-specific, not for personal gain or lateral moves, and is illegal without these justifications. Further, regarding upgradation, the Supreme Court in the Anwar-ul-Haq case (2017 SCMR 890) clarified that it is often mistaken for promotion. Promotion to a twice-upgraded post, bypassing the required selection process under the recruitment rules, is almost impossible. The established legal principle is that civil/public/government servants are appointed/promoted to posts, not just grades, as further clarified by the Supreme Court in Ali Azhar Khan Baloch, case (2015 SCMR 456), requiring no further discussion here. 8. Considering the case's specifics, ordering further promotion on a twice-upgraded post is not possible unless recruitment rules permit it. However, the respondent department must address the petitioners' seniority within three months, considering their current substantive roles (if not purely for pay/pension fixation) in their substantive rank, after hearing all parties involved. This petition, along with pending application(s), is disposed of accordingly.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

201.Suit.B 64/2012 (S.B.) M/S. J.S BANK LTD V/S GULISTAN SPINNING MILLS LTD Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 83

Scheme of arrangement once finalized cannot be objected to by non consenting creditors.

Read more

Matter:-BANKING

---

202.Const. P. 596/2025 (D.B.) Akbar Ali & Others V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1211

This Court finds the petition hit by the doctrine of laches. This doctrine, rooted in equity and fairness, presumes that persons aware of their rights must act promptly to enforce them. Petition dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Recruitment

---

203.Const. P. 597/2025 (D.B.) Salman Ahmed & Others V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1212

The apex Courts upholds the principle that equitable relief must be sought with diligence, and unreasonable delay may result in dismissal of a petition on the ground of laches. The law universally favours the vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. Petition dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Recruitment

---

204.Const. P. 663/2024 (D.B.) Shehzore V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas 2025 SHC MPK 785

Upholding Constitutional Meritocracy: The inapplicability of Deceased/Son Quota Post-Supreme Court Ruling. No right arises from a wrongful Act.

Read more

---

205.M.A. 128/2024 (S.B.) Asim Iqbal S/o Iqbal Ahmed V/S Mateen Sadiq and another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 60

In light of what has been held above, the instant appeal is allowed within no order as to costs. The matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court who is further directed to conclude the proceedings in the above-mentioned suit within a period of six (06) months from today.

Read more

Matter:-DAMAGES FOR DEFAMATION

---

206.Suit.B 63/2012 (S.B.) M/S. J.S BANK LTD V/S M/S.GULISTAN TEXTILE MILLS LTD Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 82

Scheme of arrangement once finalized cannot be objected to by non consenting creditors.

Read more

---

207.Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 725/2022 (D.B.) Artistic Milliners (Pvt) Ltd., Karachi V/S The Collector of Customs,(Export) Karachi& another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act, 1969

2025 SHC KHI 59

Export Oriented Unit; Rule 10(1)(e) and SRO 327(I)/2008 dated 29.03.2008; 10 year retention period is available and exporter cannot be compelled to dispose of goods within 5 years to attract levy of duties and taxes. Nothing can be read into the rule which is not provided therein.

Read more

Matter:-CUSTOM MATTER

---

208.Const. P. 194/2025 (S.B.) Meezan Bank Limited V/S Eduljee Dinshaw (Pvt.) Limited and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 678

The accumulated tender of rent by the Petitioner and its acceptance by the Respondent will not extinguish the default.

Read more

Matter:-RENT MATTER

---

209.Const. P. 595/2025 (D.B.) Gul Sher Jalbani V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 1210

Transfer and posting of employees constitutes internal administrative management. It is well established in service jurisprudence that no employee can claim transfer or posting as a matter of right. Petition dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Transfer (Posting)

---

210.Const. P. 1398/2018 (D.B.) Ayaz ul Islam V/S Govt. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1067

It is well-settled law that once a promotion order is acted upon and the employee has benefited from it, the order cannot be rescinded or withdrawn, especially if it has created vested rights for the employee. This principle, often referred to as animus revertendi or locus poenitentiae, protects individuals from having their accrued benefits taken away after an order has been implemented. Reference can also be made to the cases of Pakistan through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance v. Muhammad Himayatullah Farukhi (PLD 1969 SC 407), Capital Development Authority Through Chairman, Islamabad And Others v. Shabir Hussain And Others (2022 SCMR 627) and Mrs. Zeenat Parveen Jaffery versus Secretary to Government of Sind, Education Department and 4 others [1983 P L C (C.S.) 1260].

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

211.Const. P. 3257/2014 (D.B.) Raeesuddin V/S Sindh Tecnical Education And ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1068

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the Respondent's admission that the contested seniority list was/is provisional and that the petitioners' assignment as Data Processing Assistants (BPS-14) was an adjustment, not a merger, therefore it is ordered that if the Petitioners wish to retain their original cadre, post, and seniority within the Technical Education Department, Sindh Karachi (provided this department still exists and they have not merged into STEVTA since 2010), the Respondent department must hear the Petitioners. If their claim is valid on the subject issue, their original cadre and seniority, along with accrued service benefits, should be maintained according to the law. The competent authority of the respondents shall complete this process within three months after hearing the petitioners. Consequently, this petition is disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

212.Const. P. 987/2025 (D.B.) Qurban Ali Maitlo V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973

IRSA appointment.

Read more

Matter:-QUO WARRANTO

---

213.Const. P. 332/2018 (D.B.) Amjad Ali V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1069

It is well settled now that contractual employees of NADRA (which lacks statutory service rules), the petitioner could not invoke writ jurisdiction in terms of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Chairman NADRA v. Muhammad Ali Shah (2017 SCMR 1979), holding that contractual employees of statutory bodies cannot use the High Court's constitutional jurisdiction to renegotiate regularization terms. In another case Supreme Court in the case of Maj. (Retd.) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas v. Federation of Pakistan (2019 SCMR 984), stating contractual employees cannot challenge termination via writ. These precedents supported our view against the maintainability of the Constitution Petition.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

214.Const. P. 6697/2018 (D.B.) Mehroz Alam V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1070

This court directs the competent KMC authority to treat the petitioners' positions without discrimination, aligning them with the BS-9 women's squash markers within three months. Consequently, the petitions are disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

215.I.T.R.A 64/2012 (D.B.) Premier Mercantile Service(Pvt)Ltd. V/S Commissioner Inland Revenue. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Income-tax

2025 SHC KHI 674

Transaction between associated companies; loan given can be added as income under Section 85 read with Section 108 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Read more

Matter:-INCOME TAX

---

216.II.A. 74/2018 (S.B.) Brig (Rtd) Raja M. Saleem Khan V/S Mrs. Nabeela Azam Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 394

The learned counsel for the Appellant has failed to identity any substantial error in the Impugned Judgement. In light of what has been held above no case for interference in the Impugned Judgment(s) and decree(s) is made out. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

217.R.A (Civil Revision) 249/2024 (S.B.) Khuda Bux alias Iqbal V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad

Doctrine of Finality Prevails: Unchallenged revenue Orders attain perpetual legality. Jurisdiction bar precludes civil Court review.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

218.Criminal Miscelleneous 59/2025 (S.B.) Babu Bhatti V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 700, 2025 SHC LAR 741

164 Cr. P.C Statement of witness.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

219.Const. P. 4545/2018 (D.B.) Kaleem Ahmed Siddiqui V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 379

The core argument is that the 1999 Move-over Policy entitles an employee to the next higher scale one year after reaching their maximum pay. Reaching the maximum is presented as an independent criterion, not subordinate to the eight-year service requirement. Thus, employees at their maximum should not be denied move-over solely for not completing eight years, as this is an alternative condition intended to prevent pay stagnation without promotion. In this case, the petitioner, who retired on 24th May 2018, claims SVP move-over eligibility from 01/01/2017. He reached his VP scale's maximum on 01/01/2016 (promoted 01/04/2015), and the ZTBL policy allows a move-over one year after reaching maximum post-promotion. However he was simply denied his moveover based on his recovery performance being as Manager in the year 2016-2017, which prima facie is against th merit based on the anology that the employee is entitiiled to next higher scale one year after reaching maximum pay whereas petitioner reached his VP scalces maximum in the year 2016, however the denial is not based on merit, rather based on recovery, which can not be made an excuse to deny the benefit of move over policy by adding the provision in agenda item No.30 in Clause a and b which is conditional criteria cannot supersede the merit, thus the declining the request of the petitioner is not in consonance with the basic spirit of the policy.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

220.Const. P. 146/2025 (S.B.) Awais ul Haq S/o Muhammad Shuja ul Haq V/S Rabia Akhtar and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 192

In the light of what has been held above, the instant petitions are devoid of merit. No case for interference has been made out. The listed petitions are dismissed with no order as to cost.

Read more

Matter:-FAMILY MATTER

---

221.Const. P. 1229/2025 (D.B.) Saif ul Islam & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973

Due process. Termination set-aside.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

222.Const. P. 248/2021 (D.B.) Azizullah Panhwar V/S Ali Nawaz Panhwar and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 62

Jurisdiction of Encroachment Tribunal.

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Order/ Anti Encroachment

---

223.Const. P. 863/2018 (D.B.) Imran Magsi and others V/S PO Sindh Through secretary education and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 559

Appointment

Read more

Matter:-Appointment

---

224.Judicial Companies Misc. 35/2024 (S.B.) BEACH LUXURY HOLDINGS (PRIVATE) LIMITED & OTHERS V/S . Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 484

Scheme of demerger and merger sanctioned.

Read more

Matter:-MERGER

---

225.Judicial Companies Misc. 16/2011 (S.B.) M/s. New Jubilee Insurance Comp. V/S M/s. Active Apparels Int (Pvt. Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 149

Statutory notice of demand under section 306(1)(a) Companies Ordinance, 1984. Effect of.

Read more

Matter:-WIND UP

---

226.Const. P. 3640/2022 (D.B.) Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 284

Jurisdiction Precedes Adjudication: The Exclusive Domain of Service Tribunals under Article 212, Including matters pertaining to Pay Protection.

Read more

Matter:-Service

---

227.Const. P. 1457/2025 (D.B.) Iqbal Hussain V/S Tasawar Hussain & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Resjudicata , Resjudicata (Petition dismissed)

2025 SHC KHI 386

Petition hit by constructive res judicata. Costs imposed on the petitioner for filing a second petition on the same subject matter decided two weeks earlier by this bench by substituting the Respondent in the second petition (impleading his blood brother residing at the same address) and impugning afresh trial and revisional Courts Orders in the second petition passed much earlier in time which although not impugned in the first petition were discussed and observed in the first petition dismissed by this bench to be hit by laches, limitation and irrelevant for adjudication of the subject-matter dispute.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST ORDER OF CIVIL REVISION (CR)

---

228.Const. P. 749/2024 (D.B.) Ali Murtaza V/S Govt: of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 190

Salary of Probationer Employee

Read more

Matter:-RELEASING OF SALARY

---

229.Const. P. 156/2024 (D.B.) Islam Khalti & Others V/S Manik Khan & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 628

Fraud and Misrepresentation

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

230.Const. P. 4604/2017 (D.B.) Nazar Muhammad Gad V/S Federation Of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 197

With the petitioner's subsequent retirement, the challenged action has become ineffective. Therefore, this petition needs to be disposed of with the understanding that the petitioner's deferment is no longer applicable, and he is entitled to proforma promotion in line with promotions granted to his juniors, as per Rule 13 of The Sindh Civil Servants (Probation, Confirmation, and Seniority) Rules, 1975. This petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

231.Const. P. 3393/2017 (D.B.) Manzoor Ahmed V/S Federation of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 485

We understand that Pakistan Steel Mills has incurred substantial financial losses exceeding Rs. 100 billion, with total liabilities surpassing Rs. 110 billion. Given this precarious financial situation, directing PSM to grant the retired officers' claimed financial benefits under the promotion policy 2009 in these petitions is not considered appropriate at this time for the reasons discussed above in terms of the decision passed in the aforesaid proceedings. 8. Based on the reasoning outlined above, the relief requested by the petitioners cannot be granted. Consequently, these petitions are dismissed as not maintainable, along with any pending applications.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

232.Const. P. 966/2022 (D.B.) Aijaz Ali Abro V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 668

Pension Benefits Qualifying length of service.

Read more

Matter:-Regular Service

---

233.Const. P. 1979/2013 (D.B.) Abdul Razzak Memon V/S National Bank of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 277

At first glance, the previously reached settlement between the parties cannot be revisited now. However, the court order dated December 8, 2011, and the terms of their compromise agreement, which has become final, must be strictly followed. Therefore, attempting to appoint the Petitioner to a new category is unwarranted. As the Petitioner, formerly a Labour Inspector (Shops & Establishment) Zone 'C' Hyderabad, was relieved from his duties specifically to join the National Bank of Pakistan under this compromise (endorsed by this Court on December 8, 2011 in Constitutional Petition No. D-106/2010), as such his prior service must be taken into account for pension, pay determination, and other employment benefits in terms of Civil Service Regulation (CSR) Article 371-A(i) as well as in terms of compromise application. on the aforesaid proposition, we are guided by the decision of the Supreme Court in the cases of Nafees Ahmad V/S Government of Pakistan and others, 2000 SCMR 1864, Ch. Muhammad Azim V/S The Chief Engineer, Irrigation and others, 1991 SCMR 255, Chairman, Central Board of Revenue and others V/S Nawab Khan and others, 2010 SCMR 1399. And the case is reported as (2021 SCMR 1546). Besides, this protection is also provided under Fundamental Rule 22-A.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

234.Suit 113/2024 (S.B.) M/S PENG V/S THE PURPLE PINK & ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Intellectual Propoerty Organization of Pakistan Act 2012 (Rejection of Plaint or transfer to IP tribunal or Continuing hearing by High Court)

2025 SHC KHI 137

A claim seeking enforcement of contractual rights arising from a Franchise Agreement, which regulates Intellectual Property rights between parties and prays for the ancillary relief of damages/compensation, can only be instituted before the Intellectual Property Tribunal under the IPOP Act, 2012.

Read more

Matter:-Commercial Cases/Suits as per Circular dated: 30-10-2013

---

235.Cr.Bail 813/2025 (D.B.) ARIF MALIK S/O NIAZ MALIK V/S THE SSATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

236.Const. P. 468/2019 (D.B.) Abdul Hussain Soomro V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 129

Deceased Quota

Read more

Matter:-Deceased Quota

---

237.Const. P. 270/2023 (S.B.) Farooque Alias Ayaz Ali Jamali V/S Mst: Asma Jamali & Ors Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 409

A.F.R Recovery of Dowry Article

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

238.Const. P. 6609/2017 (D.B.) Naved Ahmed V/S Fed of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 464

Without touching the merits of the case and to resolve the encroachment on the public road as agitated by the parties, the Senior Member of the Board of Revenue (BOR), the Chief Executive Officer of the Cantonment Board, Korangi Creek, Karachi, and the head of the Anti-Encroachment Force Karachi are directed to jointly address this matter. They shall conduct a hearing involving all relevant parties to determine if an encroachment exists on the public road. If encroachment is confirmed, an immediate campaign must be launched to remove it from public pathways in Bhitai Colony, Karachi as well as from the relevant area. This entire process must be completed within three months. These petitions are disposed of accordingly with pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-ENCROACHMENT

---

239.Const. P. 8715/2017 (D.B.) Ehsanullah Khan V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 514

The initial impression is that Order II Rule 2 of the CPC applies in the present case for the reason that the petitioner's complaint of wrongful denial of promotion to BS-20 seems to be a single cause of action. This rule required him to seek all related remedies, including proforma promotion to both BS-20 and BS-21, in his earlier petition (C.P. NO. D-1945 OF 2013). Consequently, he is now barred from claiming a relief not granted previously. Furthermore, even if the petitioner was senior to the BS-21 promotee, that promotion stands if the Selection Board found the junior officer more meritorious. To claim proforma promotion to BS-21, the petitioner must prove not only his eligibility and the injustice of his BS-20 non-promotion but also that he was at least as meritorious as the promoted junior. This is because BS-21 is a selection post where merit, not seniority, is the paramount factor in promotions, ensuring the most capable individuals are elevated.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

240.Const. P. 937/2025 (D.B.) Syed Sahir Hasan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973 (Resolution to give effect to Article 202-A )

2025 SHC KHI 507

bail in cases of Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 2024 is to be heard by a Constitutional Bench formed under Article 202A(3) of the Constitution and not a Regular Bench

Read more

Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

241.Const. P. 1237/2023 (D.B.) Kashmir Ali & another V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 363

Regularization of service without any statutory backing is not permissible under the law. Chief Secretary is directed to take action against the delinquent officials.

Read more

Matter:-Service Regularization

---

242.Const. P. 508/2023 (D.B.) Muhammad Shoaib Palijo & Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 665

Petition challenging vires of a law while seeking enforcement of fundamental rights can only be heard by a Constitutional Bench

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

243.Const. P. 1725/2015 (D.B.) Muhammad Younis and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 465

In line with the Supreme Court's directive in Suo Moto Case No. 15 of 2010, this matter is to be addressed by the provincial government. The Chief Secretary is directed to seek the necessary approval from the competent authority to determine whether the petitioners' employment will be regularized according to the law or if they will remain on contract until retirement. This decision must be made within three months after hearing the petitioners' perspective. Consequently, this petition is now disposed of under these specified conditions.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

244.Const. P. 6920/2016 (D.B.) Owais Ali and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 317

The respondents have established a committee, including representatives from the Local Government & HTP Department and the Secretary of HDA, to examine the cases of former HDA contract, work-charge, and daily wage employees, in light of a Supreme Court order from November 29, 2023, and the Sindh Regularization Act of 2013. While the petitioners request a resolution of their petition per the Supreme Court's directive, the learned Assistant Advocate General (AAG) submitted that their case does not fall within the scope of that Supreme Court decision and thus cannot be decided on those terms, praying for the dismissal of the petition. Regardless, let this matter first be referred to the Secretary of the Local Government Department to scrutinize the petitioners' case. If their case falls outside the purview of the newly formed committee, the petitioners must be granted a hearing, and a decision should be reached within three months.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

245.Cr.Bail 586/2024 (S.B.) Jongal Khan @ Babal Korejo and Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 525

Case calling for further inquiry, pre-arrest bail granted

Read more

Matter:-BAIL BEFORE ARREST

---

246.Const. P. 1216/2016 (D.B.) Mohammad Azam Jalbani V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 454

The learned Assistant Advocate General (AAG) has informed the court that Mr. Muhammad Azam Jalbani was indeed promoted to Superintending Engineer (BS-19) as per the notification dated April 21, 2017. Based on this submission, the court has observed that the initial matter concerning petitioner's promotion appears to be resolved. The court has further directed the department to review the matter, considering that significant time has passed since 2016. If the issue was not resolved previously, the department is directed to resolve it in accordance with the law within a period of three months. Consequently, the petition stand is disposed of under these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

247.Cr.Bail 126/2025 (S.B.) Ali Dost Jhangwani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 582

Case calling for further inquiry, pre-arrest bail granted

Read more

Matter:-BAIL BEFORE ARREST

---

248.Const. P. 1542/2025 (D.B.) Anam Salman Jamali and Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 222

Petitions challenging the 2 years active practice eligibility requirement for appointment as civil judge / judicial magistrate.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST AMENDMENT

---

249.Const. P. 4281/2016 (D.B.) Dr. Sarfaraz Ahmed and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 310

Generally, a court should not readily interfere with an evaluation conducted by an Expert Committee, as the court typically lacks the specialized knowledge required for such assessments. It is an established legal principle that, within its designated powers and authority, the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) must evaluate each promotion proposal individually, in accordance with the law. In instances where a disciplinary case or criminal prosecution against a civil/government servant remains unresolved even two years after the initial DPC meeting deferred its findings regarding that individual, the appointing authority may consider granting an ad-hoc promotion, as per legal provisions.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

250.R.A (Civil Revision) 34/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Ruqiya Qureshi and Others V/S Akhtiar Ali Sangi and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 448

Section 44 Transfer of Property Act. (Joint Possession of Dwelling House)

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Judgement

---

251.Const. P. 6595/2017 (D.B.) Ms. Khizra Saeed V/S Fed of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 250

The regularization of contractual employees through writ jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution is contingent upon its permissibility under existing law and a universally applicable policy decision, provided the organization in question falls under the High Court's writ jurisdiction. This principle was also upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Faraz Ahmed vs. Federation of Pakistan (2022 SCMR 1680). The Supreme Court specifically established that contractual employees do not possess an inherent right to regularization. However, their regularization may be considered based on their fitness, suitability, and the relevant laws, rules, and regulations of their respective department. An automatic right to regularization does not exist unless explicitly provided by law, and employees seeking it must demonstrate a statutory basis for their claim; otherwise, relief cannot be granted.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

252.Const. P. 5627/2016 (D.B.) Muhammad Kamaluddin V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 329

Previously, the private respondent (now relevant to the current petitioner's seniority claim) sought promotion as an Assistant Accountant BPS-15. This court, noting the official respondents' commitment to consider the promotion in an upcoming DPC within six months, disposed of that petition. Now, the current petitioner requests the court to retroactively correct his initial BPS to BPS-15 from his appointment date and place him above the private respondent in the seniority list. He also seeks to prevent the promotion of any junior employee to Assistant Accounts Officer BPS-16 until his case is resolved. The respondents submitted that the private respondent's BPS-15 appointment followed a different advertisement with distinct criteria and that the petitioner's promotion to BPS-15 was through a DPC. They also clarified that a later BPS-13 to BPS-14 upgrade was not retroactive. The private respondent asserted his seniority in the BPS-15 cadre, which the official respondents claimed the petitioner had never challenged before. They alleged the petitioner's current action is driven by ulterior motives following the private respondent's earlier petition and cite a previous court order (dated 20.4.2017 in C.P D No. 3006 2016) in their favor. This court concludes that this seniority issue needs to be resolved by the competent authority of the respondents after hearing both parties within three months. This petition stands disposed of in these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

253.Const. P. 6400/2017 (D.B.) Safia Bano V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 556

In conclusion, while the petitioner has acquired educational qualifications that might make her eligible to apply for a teaching position, it is unlikely that there exists a direct promotion rule that allows a Lab Attendant to automatically be promoted to a High School Teacher. Her best course of action would be to look out for and apply to relevant teaching vacancies advertised by the Sindh government, provided she meets the stipulated criteria for those posts. 7. This petition stands dismissed with pending application(s).

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

254.Const. P. 805/2016 (D.B.) Sarfaraz Ahmed V/S N.B.P and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 302

The core issue is whether the Petitioner fulfilled the mandatory five-year service requirement with the respondent bank from his appointment date of March 20, 2010, until his termination letter dated January 19, 2016. Although clause 6.2 of the appointment letter stipulated a five-year service period, which appeared to have been completed by March 2015, this is rendered complex by the regularization of the Petitioner's unauthorized absence from September 8, 2014, to February 12, 2015 (258 days), as unpaid Extraordinary Leave. Furthermore, the Petitioner submitted his resignation on April 27, 2015, to which the respondent bank replied on May 8, 2015, requesting the settlement of liabilities. Given that the five-year term was completed during this period, it seems this clause should not have been invoked. Instead, the Petitioner's resignation could have been accepted. The respondent bank's inaction in this regard, persistently demanding liability clearance under clause 6.2, demonstrates a lack of consideration, ultimately forcing the Petitioner to file the present petition on February 10, 2016. Consequently, this petition is allowed, and the respondent bank is hereby directed to address the Petitioner's resignation and issue a decision within two months from the date of this order and if need to pursue any autstandig liabilities before the court of competent jurisdicition. The contested orders are accordingly overturned.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

255.Const. P. 240/2024 (S.B.) Mst Shamshad begum Through Attorney V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 158

Rent Controller in appropriate cases may invoke the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Read more

Matter:-Rent Matter

---

256.Const. P. 1131/2019 (S.B.) Sanaullah Thahim S/o Mir Nihal Khan Thahim V/S Saeed Ahmed Brohi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979

2025 SHC KHI 264

Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979.

Read more

Matter:-RENT MATTER

---

257.Const. P. 5575/2016 (D.B.) Syed Sajjad Ali Shah V/S Chief Sect: and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 656

The consistent stance of the Supreme Court is that contractual employees possess no inherent right to regularization. Regularization can only be considered based on fitness, suitability, and applicable departmental laws and rules. Cases like Khushal Khan Khattak University v. Jabran Ali Khan (2021 SCMR 977), Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa v. Raheel Ali Gohar (2020 SCMR 2068), and others reiterate that regularization requires a legal and statutory basis. Contractual employees serve at the pleasure of their master and cannot seek reinstatement for wrongful termination, only compensation through a competent court. Chairman NADRA v. Muhammad Ali Shah (2017 SCMR 1979) clarifies that contractual employees are governed by their contract terms until regularized and generally cannot invoke the High Court's constitutional jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that temporary, contract, or project employees lack a vested right to regularization unless their initial appointment followed regular recruitment rules against sanctioned vacant posts, which is not the case here. Vice-Chancellor, Bacha Khan University v. Tanveer Ahmad (2022 PLC (C.S.) 85), Pakistan Telecommunication Company Ltd. v. Muhammad Samiullah (2021 SCMR 998), Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa v. Sher Aman (2022 SCMR 406), and Deputy Director Finance and Administration FATA v. Dr. Lal Marjan (2022 SCMR 566) all decisions confirm that regularization is not a vested right but requires a statutory basis, which is absent in this instance. A contractual employee seeking regularization must demonstrate this statutory basis, as relief cannot be granted solely on the principle of "similarly placed persons."

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

258.II.A. 38/2023 (S.B.) M/s. P.N.S.C. Karachi & anoother V/S Mohammad Reyaz s/o Abdul Kalam & others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 577

In light of above discussion, I am of the view that both the Courts below have erred while passing the Impugned Judgments and the same require interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Impugned Judgement and Decree dated 13.10.2022 and 19.10.2022 respectively in Civil Appeal No. 295/2020 and Impugned Judgement and Decree dated 14.09.2020 and 21.09.2020 respectively in Civil Suit No.376/2014 are hereby set aside. Suit 376/2014 is dismissed. Office to prepare a decree accordingly within 15 days from today.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

259.Const. P. 987/2025 (D.B.) Qurban Ali Maitlo V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973

IRSA appointment.

Read more

Matter:-QUO WARRANTO

---

260.Const. P. 143/2025 (D.B.) Izhar Ali Dhamraho V/S CEO SEPCO Sukkur & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 276

Pagri system in allotment of Government Accommodation.

Read more

Matter:-Vacation Of Quarters

---

261.Const. P. 4242/2017 (D.B.) Niaz Muhammad V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 594

Given the AAG's statement regarding the petitioners' current pay scales (BPS-17 for #1-6, BPS-16 upgraded to BPS-17 for #7-13 & #15-18, and BPS-11 upgraded to BPS-17 for #14) and the cancellation of prior upgrade orders under the 2020 Rules, this court finds itself unable to order the petitioners' post upgradation under Article 199 of the Constitution of 1973. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

262.Const. P. 1039/2014 (D.B.) Afghan Ali @ Oghan Ali V/S Chief Executive Officer SEPCO Sukkur and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 237

Reinstatement in Service

Read more

Matter:-Reinstate

---

263.Const. P. 4769/2014 (D.B.) Muhammad Kausar Noor V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 637

Drawing an analogy from the present situation and, more importantly, guided by the principles established by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Dr. Naveeda Tufail and 72 others v. Government of Punjab and others (2003 SCMR 291) and Shahzad Shahmir and others v Government of Sindh & others (2021 SCMR 824). The Dr. Naveeda Tufail case shows that the Federal Government regularized ad hoc employees through the Public Service Commission. While the Petitioners, as provincial contract employees, cannot automatically claim this, Article 25 of the Constitution calls for equal treatment. In Naveeda Tufail, the Supreme Court recognized a legitimate expectation of regularization for Punjab's ad hoc lecturers due to continuous ad hoc appointments. The Supreme Court directed the Punjab government to regularize them via the Punjab Public Service Commission, following the Federal model with some concessions, ensuring separate consideration from direct recruits and non-retention of unsuitable candidates. This case highlights the need for fairness and the Public Service Commission's role in regularization.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

264.Const. P. 1524/2016 (D.B.) Raees Mohammad V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 345

At the outset, we address the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The maintainability of a writ petition against the Respondent-Bank is supported by the Supreme Court's judgments in Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited, etc vs. Said Rehman & others (2013 SCMR 642) and Muhammad Rafiullah & others vs. Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited & another (2018 SCMR 598). Based on these precedents, we conclude that this Petition falls within the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court and can be heard and decided on its merits.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

265.Const. P. 1462/2020 (D.B.) Zakir Hussain Dharejo V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 905

It is well-settled that the exercise of writ jurisdiction is discretionary. Principles of equity, such as delay, acquiescence, and waiver, must be considered. Petition is dismissed being hit by laches.

Read more

Matter:-Recruitment

---

266.Const. P. 17/2025 (D.B.) Sadaf Gul & Others V/S Sain Bux & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 168

Right of Fair Trial

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

267.Const. P. 6753/2014 (D.B.) Habib Ahmed Siddiqui V/S Province Of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 603

At this point, the petitioner's counsel stated that the sole remaining matter for resolution concerns the petitioner's promotion from BS-8 to BS-15 during his service period before his retirement as he was eligible and fit for promotion, however that was delayed leading him to retire, as such he is entitled for proforma promotion. This specific aspect of the case requires review by the respondents' competent authority within three months. This review should be conducted after hearing the petitioner's perspective, in accordance with the principles established by the Supreme Court in the cases of Capital Development Authority v Shabbir Hussain & others (2022 SCMR 627) and The Chairman Central Board of Revenue vs Muhammad Mlook (1999 SCMR 1540). This petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

268.Const. P. 2950/2014 (D.B.) Suhail Ahmed and Ors V/S Province of Sind and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 193

The policy governing up-gradation takes into account structural improvements, increased responsibilities, and pay scale inconsistencies, generally disallowing individual-based up-gradations. However, the Respondents also acknowledged that the Marine Fisheries Department (MFD) had already submitted up-gradation proposals for Research Assistants to BPS-14 to the relevant central bodies, with previous proposals facing delays, and that this matter is currently under their review. If this is the position of the case, these cases need to be referred back to the competent authority within the Respondents' administration. This authority needs to examine the issue of either upgrading the Petitioners' posts or considering them for promotion according to the prevailing recruitment rules, provided they meet the eligibility and fitness criteria for the position as requested, and after providing them an opportunity to be heard if they are still employed in the respondent department. This approach aligns with the Supreme Court's decisions in similar cases as discussed supra. Consequently, these petitions are being disposed of under these specified terms. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the respondents for compliance.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

269.Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 160/2024 (D.B.) M/s. New Era Fabric, Karachi V/S Commissioner Inland Revenue Zone-I, CTO, Kar.& Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sale Tax Act 1990

2025 SHC KHI 58

imposition of penalty under section 33 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; element of mensrea still a requirement unlike section 34 of the Act.

Read more

Matter:-SALES TAX.

---

270.Const. P. 801/2019 (D.B.) Zahoor Ahmed Samtio V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 161

Allegation levelled in the petition requires factual inquiry, which falls beyond the Constitutional jurisdiction. In absence of pointing out any mala fide or gross illegality. The petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-Recruitment

---

271.Const. P. 621/2023 (D.B.) Nisar Ahmed Nagrejo V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 306

Petition is hit by laches. Legitimate expectations does not create a legal right..

Read more

Matter:-Issue Appointment Order

---

272.Const. P. 3666/2016 (D.B.) Ahmed Nawaz and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 214

Prisons Department has been pursuing the extension of these benefits to their teachers since the early 1990s, engaging in correspondence with the Home and Finance Departments. The matter remains "under process" with the government, with requests for information and financial implications being exchanged. The AAG requests the court to pass orders as deemed appropriate given the ongoing process, more particularly the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ali Azhar Khan Baluch case 2015 SCMR 456.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

273.Const. P. 1327/2023 (D.B.) Mst. Iffat Khattak and Another V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 312

It may be noted that although the Colleges in question are permanent and are required to have permanent status, the staff which is working therein is required to have permanent status. However, the respondents have created the relationship between the petitioners and Hadeed Welfare Trust as master and servant to avoid the regularization of their service, as the issue has already been set at naught by the judgment rendered by this Court in Hafeez Junejo???s case has been implemented in its letter and spirit. Additionally, the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has already taken care of the issue of regularization of service of teaching staff in the aforesaid cases; as such, no further deliberation is required on our part.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE / REGULARIZATION

---

274.Const. P. 1749/2015 (D.B.) Abdul Wahid and others V/S Fed: of Pakistan and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 241

From 2010-2016, before formal FMU rules, petitioners submitted that Clause 31 of 2009 rules mandated applying State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) policies to their perks and privileges. They highlight that FMU adopted SBP's Monetized Salary Scales, approved by the PM, to attract market specialists with competitive packages. Petitioners contended that the same rationale necessitates implementing SBP's employee benefits at FMU, as SBP policies on appraisal, increments, TA/DA, and leave are already in effect for them. Despite lump-sum salaries upon appointment, governed by FMU rules (approved earlier than stated), petitioners were placed on SBP-aligned FMU scales. They pointed out that SBP officers at FMU received full SBP benefits per Rule 9(xiii). Thus, petitioners asserted that FMU Rule 31 entitled them to SBP's allowances, benefits, perks, and perquisites. Having served for several years without any issue, their non-confirmation contradicts FMU rules. They submitted that benefits like Employee Loans are limited to confirmed staff, causing frustration and resignations, including trained Analysts. Therefore, the petitioners requested that the application of SBP-related benefits under FMU Rule 31 from their appointment date and confirmation of their service as per FMU rules after completing probation.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

275.Const. P. 609/2015 (D.B.) Dr. Tasnim Ahsan V/S Govt Of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 172

This petition is being disposed of with the understanding that the Sindh government's retirement notification dated December 29, 2014, has already been implemented, and the petitioner has received some pension benefits. These benefits will be subject to the final outcome of the review petition regarding the core issue, which is currently pending before the Supreme Court between the Federal and Sindh governments. Therefore, this court will not delve into the merits of that underlying controversy at this stage, as the matter is sub judice. However, the respondent Sindh government is directed to abide by the Supreme Court's decision on their review application. The consequences of the Supreme Court's ruling (whether the review succeeds or fails) will then follow. This petition is disposed of in these terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

276.Const. P. 4984/2015 (D.B.) Piar ALi Jokhio V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 232

Prima facie, this issue of late submission of Domicile and PRC, which prompted the respondents not to consider their candidature, needs to be looked into by the Secretary of Education after hearing both the petitioners within three months if the petitioners meet the requisite criteria as set out in the Teachers Recruitment Policy 2012; besides no other candidates having lower marks superseded the petitioners. A copy of this order shall be sent to Secretary Education for compliance. These petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-APPOINTMENT

---

277.Const. P. 3459/2015 (D.B.) Dr. Asma Sarwar Khan and Ors V/S Govt. of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 441

It appears that much water has flown under the bridge since 2015 when the captioned petitions were filed to claim implementation of the order dated 15.04.2012 passed by this Court in C.P. No.D-215 of 2012. Without touching the merits of the cases, these petitions can be resolved by directing the respondent department to look into the issue involved in the petition if the petitioners??? cause still subsists. In the meanwhile, the respondents are mandated to advertise all job vacancies that have not been previously advertised. This would ensure that all eligible individuals have the opportunity to compete for these positions if vacant based purely on merit through a competitive process.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

278.Const. P. 2257/2015 (D.B.) Muhammad Abbas Halepota V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 471

It is well-settled law that the right to claim a pension is a right connected with the tenure of service, which under the applicable pension rules has to be served by an employee to make him eligible for a pension. So, to claim a pension, the minimum qualifying service is the threshold that has to be crossed first, which would then entitle an employee to claim the pension.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

279.Const. P. 2792/2015 (D.B.) Muhammad Asif V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 475

The foundation of the petitioner's case rests upon the precedent established in the matter of the Taimur Ali Khan case (C.P No. 2873 of 2012). In that instance, KPT proposed a Grade-II Traffic Supervisor position with seniority commencing from January 1, 2014, while declining to pay retroactive salary. Despite Taimur Ali Khan's initial request for arrears, this Court ultimately mandated his immediate assumption of the offered role. The present petitioner seeks analogous relief based on the findings of the division bench of this Court, as such deviation at this stage is almost impossible as the matter is sub judice before the Supreme Court. Consequently, this petition can be resolved in the same manner, contingent upon the Chairman of KPT's impartial determination, following a hearing with the petitioner within a three-month time frame, that the petitioner's circumstances are comparable to those of the Taimur Ali Khan case as discussed supra.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

280.Const. P. 326/2022 (S.B.) M/s. SINDHLAB (PRIVATE) LIMITED V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 182

In view of the forgoing reasons the instant petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. However, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to file an appeal under the above-mentioned Section at the appropriate forum and the time spent by the Petitioner in the instant petition shall be excluded for the purposes of computing limitation.

Read more

Matter:-WORKMAN

---

281.Const. P. 2616/2014 (D.B.) Gulsher Siyal V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 614

CSR Article 420 states that a break in an officer's service typically forfeits their previous service, except in these situations: (a) Approved leave. (b) Unauthorized absence directly following approved leave, as long as their position isn't permanently filled. If it is, the prior service is lost. (c) Suspension is immediately followed by reinstatement (in the same or a different role), or if the officer dies, retires, or is retired while suspended. (d) Abolition of their position or job loss due to staff reduction. (e) Transfer by a competent authority to non-pensionable service within government control (voluntary resignation from pensionable service forfeits this). Transferring to a grant-in-aid school also leads to forfeiture. (f) Transfer to the President's household staff. (g) Time spent traveling between appointments when transferred by a competent authority or, for non-gazetted officers, with their previous head of office's consent. (h) Any other reason provided the break wasn't due to the government servant's fault or intentional action (like unauthorized absence, resignation, or removal). Besides CSR Regulation 423 provides automatic relaxation of six months in case of short service, if he or she, is entitled for pensionary benefits as such the question of latches are of no significance at this stage as the petitioner is requesting for continuation of his past service in different government departments.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

282.R.A (Civil Revision) 76/2023 (S.B.) Azizullah Soomro & another V/S Muzafar Hussain Soomro & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 273

Recording of additional evidence during the Appellate proceeding.

Read more

Matter:-Against Order

---

283.Const. P. 986/2014 (D.B.) Mohammad Khursheed V/S Fed. Of Pakistan and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 207

The petitioners are reportedly retired, and one has passed away during the case's proceedings, although no updated title reflecting this has been submitted. The core issue is the restoration of their basic pay to its pre-April 2012 level, particularly considering the cessation of Pakistan Steel's operations in 2015 and the retirement benefits already received by the petitioners. As such, no further cause of action appears to exist. The petition seems to have become ineffective ("infructuous") due to the closure of the Steel Mills after 2015. Therefore, remanding the case to Pakistan Steel or its affiliated company to re-fix the petitioners' pay after their retirement would be unproductive. Consequently, this petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

284.Const. P. 1333/2025 (D.B.) Muhammad Anjum V/S Govt of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 140

5. The Supreme Court in the recent judgment in the case of Sakhib Zar vs. M/s K-Electric Limited & others ( 2024 SCMR 1722) has held that even 10 days??? absence without leave is quantified as misconduct and on proving the guilt of the employee after fulfilling the requisite formalities envisaged under the law, and that could not be modified. No premium or advantage could be given on this count for any compassionate or sympathetic view. The management has a legitimate and unbridled right and authority to make a decision and mete out the punishment as provided under the law, including the dismissal/termination of service of a delinquent. 6. The Supreme Court further held that the distinction between the act of misconduct and the quantum of punishment provided under the law for such misconduct. Likewise, different acts of misconduct are defined in the different laws with different quantum or genres of punishments to be 5 imposed according to the fine sense of judgment of the competent authority/management/employer, in which the Courts have no role to play in the decision making of management which is the sole arbiter.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

285.Const. P. 3095/2010 (D.B.) Syed Shoukat Ali & Ors. V/S Province of Sindh & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 204

Without addressing the substantive arguments of these cases and merits, these petitions are now considered concluded and are hereby disposed of in the terms that much water has flown under the bridge since 2008 and we are now in 2025 besides petitioners have not asked for the issuance of writ of quo warranto against the individual who were purportedly appointed in violation of the rules as no record has been produced to infer adverse against them at this stage in a case of writ of mandamus. However, if the cause of action for these petitions still exists, the petitioners retain the right to initiate appropriate legal action, including proceedings under a writ of quo warranto, if they believe the appointments of the private respondents are contrary to law and if such legal recourse is permissible. These petitions are disposed of along with the pending application(s) in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

286.Const. P. 4754/2014 (D.B.) Nabi Hussain and Ors V/S M.D KW & SB and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 391

Upgradation with retrospective effect" refers to a situation where an employee's pay scale is increased to a higher level, without a change in their duties or position, and this increase is applied to a period before the official date of the upgradation. It is further clarified that upgradation cannot be construed to be promotion, as is generally misunderstood. Up-gradation is carried out without necessarily creating a post in the relevant scale of pay it is carried out under a policy and specified scheme. It is only for the incumbents of isolated posts, which have no avenues or channels of promotion at all. Up-gradation under the scheme is personal to incumbents of the isolated posts to address stagnation and frustration of incumbents on a particular post for a sufficient length of service on the particular post without any progression or avenue in the service.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

287.Const. P. 1015/2014 (D.B.) LT CDR (R) Dr. Muhammad Nawaz V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 583

The primary submissions of the petitioner is that the staff plot is a contractual entitlement. However, this raises the question of whether a Constitutional Petition is the appropriate legal avenue for an employee of a statutory corporation with non-statutory service rules to enforce the terms of those rules. Established service law dictates that if a statutory body's employee service conditions aren't governed by statute-based rules but by internal rules or instructions, their violation is generally not enforceable through constitutional jurisdiction and falls under the principle of master and servant. Here, the petitioner seeks enforcement of the DHA Service Rules 2008, which this Court cannot typically enforce via a Constitutional Petition. This position is supported by the Supreme Court of Pakistan's ruling in Pakistan Defense Officers Housing Authority vs. Mrs. Itrat Sajjad Khan and others (2017 SCMR 2010).

Read more

Matter:-ALLOTMENT OF PLOT

---

288.Const. P. 4092/2014 (D.B.) Imran Khan Siyal V/S Prov. of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 532

Generally, a contract employee who resigns forfeits the right to demand regularization. Resignation is a voluntary termination of the contract, which outlines employment terms. Regularization, a separate process for permanent positions, is not automatically triggered by resignation and requires specific policies or employer decisions. Contract employees don't have an inherent right to regularization based solely on service length or satisfaction. While legal remedies might exist for the unfair use of resignation to avoid regularization, they don't guarantee it.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

289.Const. P. 511/2024 (D.B.) Muhammad Haneef Soomro V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 618

Mere securing passing marks in examination does not create vested right for appointment.

Read more

Matter:-Recruitment

---

290.M.A. 23/2024 (S.B.) Muhammad Sadiq Thr. Attorney Mohammad Tahir V/S Muhammad Hassan and Another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 508

The ???awareness??? of the Appellant and the alleged ???concealment??? cannot conceivably be grounds for rejection of the plaint. In light of what has been held above, the Impugned Order is hereby set-aside, consequently the matter is remanded back of the learned Tribunal for deciding the same on merits after recording of evidence. The learned Tribunal is further directed not to be influenced with the findings in the Impugned Order. Accordingly, instant Misc. Appeal is allowed in the above terms with no order as to cost.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

---

291.Const. P. 434/2023 (S.B.) Sarfarazuddin S/o Rafiullah V/S M/s. Paras Commercial Company and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979

2025 SHC KHI 380

Limitation condoned. The Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979.

Read more

Matter:-RENT MATTER

---

292.Const. P. 235/2025 (S.B.) Atif S/o Latif V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 320

The law enjoins the police to be scrupulously fair to the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Aberrations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the law and order situation have been the subject of adverse comments from this Court as well as from other courts but they have failed to have any corrective effect on it. The police has the power to arrest a person even without obtaining a warrant of arrest from a court. The plenty of this power casts an obligation on the police and it must bear in mind, as held by this Court that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated. However it is made clear that police is free to take action against any person who is indulged in criminal activities subject to law. 8. The DIGP concerned is directed to prioritize this matter and, after hearing both parties within two weeks, address the alleged police misconduct. If the officials are found culpable, departmental proceedings for their punishment must be initiated, and they shall be assigned non-field duties in the interim period.

Read more

Matter:-HARASSMENT

---

293.Const. P. 5/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Nasira Khalique Thr. Ms. Seema Khalique V/S The Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 46

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. I intentionally not making any detail comments as the issues of the matter between the parties pending adjudication before the concerned court with regard to the interim relief application in terms of Section 7(1) of the Illegal Dispossession Act 2005 to hand over possession of the subjected premises to the petitioner; that Illegal Dispossession Case needs to be decided by the competent court after hearing the parties if pending as the petitioner has already sought a similar prayer in the Illegal Dispossession case and so far as the restoration of possession of concerned the trial court has to see this aspect for interim custody of the subject premises if the petitioner was found forcibly evicted from the premises in question if she possessed the valid rent agreement and decision be made within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Read more

Matter:-HARASSMENT

---

294.Const. P. 255/2025 (S.B.) Zubaida W/O Muhammad Irfan V/S Inspector General of Police (IGP) Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 415

The law enjoins the police to be scrupulously fair to the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Aberrations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the law and order situation have been the subject of adverse comments from this Court as well as from other courts but they have failed to have any corrective effect on it. The police has the power to arrest a person even without obtaining a warrant of arrest from a court. The plenty of this power casts an obligation on the police and it must bear in mind, as held by this Court that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated. However it is made clear that police is free to take action against any person who is indulged in criminal activities subject to law. However no harassment shall be caused to the petitioner, if she acts within the bonds of law. Police shall also ensure respect of the family shed in accordance with law and if they have reasonable ground to prevent the congnizable offence they can act, so far as raiding the house is concerned the police shall secure concrete evidence and obtain necessary permission from the concerned high police official/Magistrate as a issue of security of the house is concerned, which is not public place under the Act 1977. 9. Considering the aforementioned details, the objective of filing this petition has been achieved. Consequently, this petition is hereby disposed of in the terms stated above.

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

295.Const. P. 1479/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Shir Bano and another V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 658

Primarily, this is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes; if the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or interreligious marriage the maximum they can do if they can cut off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate for acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage. I therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities will see, if any boy or girl who is major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a woman or man who is a major, the couple is neither harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against such person(s) as provided by law. However, the above observation is without prejudice to the legal rights of the parties, arising out of the over marriage of the couple, if any, pending before the competent court of law.

Read more

Matter:-HARASSMENT

---

296.Const. P. 245/2025 (S.B.) Qurban Ali S/o Qasim V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 296

The law enjoins the police to be scrupulously fair to the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Aberrations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the law and order situation have been the subject of adverse comments from this Court as well as from other courts but they have failed to have any corrective effect on it. The police has the power to arrest a person even without obtaining a warrant of arrest from a court. The plenty of this power casts an obligation on the police and it must bear in mind, as held by this Court that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated.

Read more

Matter:-HARASSMENT

---

297.Const. P. 209/2025 (S.B.) Saifullah Jamali (Disable) V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 552

After arguing the matter at some length, both parties have agreed to the disposal of the instant petition on the premise that the DIGP Malir will hear the petitioner as well as private respondents and will take care of all the aspects of the case and ensure that no harassment shall be caused to both the parties. The proposal seems to be reasonable and acceded to. In the meantime police shall remain neutral in the private dispute between the parties, however, if any of the individuals is indulged in criminal activity the police shall take prompt action against them under law. 5. The instant petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

298.Const. P. 198/2024 (S.B.) Muhammad Khalid Sheikh S/o Muhammad Yousuf Sheikh V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 315

Admittedly, this is the case of harassment at hands of police in connivance with private respondents. The main objectives of police is to apprehend offenders, investigate crimes, and prosecute them before the cours also to prevent to commission of crime, and above all ensure law and order to protect citizen???s life and property.

Read more

Matter:-PROTECTION

---

299.Const. P. 188/2025 (S.B.) Shaikh Osama Rafi S/o Shaikh Muhammad Rafi V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 248

Wthout prejudice the rights of the parties this matter is referred to the concerned DIGP to resolve the dispute between the parties after hearing them within two weeks. If the DIGP finds evidence of a cognizable offense by either party, he shall direct the relevant SHO to record statements and proceed according to the law. This petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-HARASSMENT

---

300.Const. P. 950/2022 (S.B.) Javed Iqbal S/o Ahsan Ghani V/S Inspector General Sindh (IG) and Another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 619

Keeping in view the statement made in the proceedings, I cannot determine in the constitutional jurisdiction whether the petitioner is innocent or he has been falsely implicated in the cases or not, However, the IGP Sindh shall ensure adherence of the orders dated 03.11.2022, 10.03.2025 and 24.03.2025, before taking further action. 11. I am also of the view that the statement of Learned AAG and APG is tenable to the effect that an Enquiry Committee, headed by DIGP Investigation Karachi, was formed on March 12, 2025, to investigate the claim of the petitioner through CMA No. 2299 of 2025. The findings are pending finalization and will be submitted without delay. They also stated that directives for strict compliance have been issued to all Karachi units, with non-compliance facing departmental action. Furthermore, they submitted that an existing enquiry is underway. Therefore, they are directed to complete the proceedings and submit the enquiry report to this court through MIT-II of this Court. 12. This petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

301.Const. P. 191/2024 (S.B.) Arshad Ali Gorar V/S Mst Uzma & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana 2025 SHC LAR 460

Custody of a minor on re-marriage of mother.

Read more

Matter:-Impugned Judgement

---

302.Const. P. 223/2025 (S.B.) Pujab Beverages Company Pvt. Ltd V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 183

Considering the aforementioned details, the objective of filing this petition has been achieved. Consequently, this petition is hereby disposed of in the terms stated above. However no harassment shall be caused to either party and the case shall be decided by the competent court of law if pending.

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

303.Const. P. 219/2025 (S.B.) Mst. Kazo and another V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 243

SSP and SHO concerned are also required to protect the petitioners and also secure the PR Bond of the private respondent in the sum of Rs. 500,000/- (Rupees Five hundred thousand only) each and the same shall be kept in the police station to the effect that no harm shall be caused to the petitioners. 5. In view of the above, this Constitutional Petition is disposed of

Read more

Matter:-HARASSMENT

---

304.Const. P. 1257/2025 (D.B.) Saleem Raza V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act, 1969

2025 SHC KHI 418

Section 155F of the Customs Act; User ID of a person cannot be blocked or suspended without notice and hearing

Read more

Matter:-CUSTOM MATTER

---

305.Const. P. 940/2024 (D.B.) Mumtaz Ali ansari V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 393

Petitioner approached the Court by supressing material facts not entitle for the relief sought. Petition dismissed with cost.

Read more

Matter:-RELEASING OF SALARY

---

306.Const. P. 4002/2011 (D.B.) Ibrahim Noor V/S Pakistan International Airlines Corporation & Ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 260

Even, if a petitioner was acquitted in a criminal case following a conviction, in NAB Reference No. 20/2011, this does not automatically lead to exoneration from departmental charges based on the same factual grounds. While a writ under Article 199 is available in specific limited situations, it is generally not the appropriate remedy to contest a dismissal from service based on these charges, particularly when the employee was afforded a full opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and present his/her defense but did not convince the department of his/her innocence. 10. Based on the findings of the inquiry committee, this petition is not considered maintainable and is therefore liable to be dismissed, which is dismissed accordingly with pending application(s) if any.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

307.Const. P. 4785/2013 (D.B.) Anwaruddin Solangi and Ors V/S Fed.of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 353

Since Pakistan Steel Mill is no more in operation since 2015 as such the case of the petitioner cannot be referred to the respondent for continuation of their services from the date of joining in Pakistan Steel. 8. For the reasons stated above, this court finds the petition to be without legal or factual foundation and therefore dismisses it. This court concurs with the respondents' position as contend in the comments, and their request is thus acceded to. All pending applications, if any, are also dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

308.Const. P. 6238/2015 (D.B.) Abdul Majeed V/S Federation of Pakistan & ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 307

In line with the opinion of the Advocate General Sindh, as detailed in the preceding paragraph, the petitioner's resignation from the Board, submitted as a consequence of his absorption, is considered invalid. In a landmark judgment as discussed supra, the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared all absorptions in different cadres as illegal, ordering employees to revert to their parent departments, while ensuring their seniority is retained. 12. This petition is hereby disposed of with the direction that the respondent, BISE Sukkur, must fully implement the Supreme Court's judgments (2013 SCMR 1752 and 2015 SCMR 456) by ordering the petitioner's return to his parent department while protecting his seniority, if he has not superannuated yet. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within three months.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

309.M.A. 182/2024 (S.B.) CSM Pakistan (Guarantee) Limited V/S Kresta Corp Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 455

For the foregoing reasons the instant appeal is allowed. The Impugned Order dated 31.08.2024 is set aside with no order as to cost. The learned Tribunal shall decide the case without being influenced by the findings in the Impugned Order, after recording of evidence of both parties.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

---

310.Const. P. 812/2018 (D.B.) Mohammad Sibtain & anothers V/S Fed: of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 PLJ 100

No writ petition is maintainable against an employer under Article 199 of the Constitution where employment rules are non-statutory, and the employer-employee relationship is governed by the principle of master and servant.

Read more

Matter:-DIRECTION

---

311.Const. P. 114/2025 (S.B.) Mst. Zoya and another V/S The Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 503

Additionally, the main objectives of the police is to apprehend offenders, investigate crimes, and prosecute them before the Courts, also to prevent the commission of crime, and above all, ensure law and order to protect citizens' lives and property. The law enjoins the police to be scrupulously fair to the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Deviations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the law and order situation have been the subject of adverse comments from this Court as well as from other Courts, but they have failed to have any corrective effect on it. The police have the power to arrest a person even without obtaining a warrant of arrest from a Court for cognizable offenses. The presence of this power casts an obligation on the police, and they must bear in mind, as held by this Court from time to time in its various pronouncemnts, that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated. Primarily, the Police Officers are required to protect and not abduct.

Read more

Matter:-PROTECTION

---

312.R.A (Civil Revision) 193/2011 (S.B.) Rasool Bux V/S Province of Sindh another Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 340

Colonization and disposal of Government Lands Sindh Act, 1912

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

313.Const. P. 107/2023 (S.B.) Mst Rubeena Chohan V/S Abdul Haq & others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2025 SHC SUK 170

Granted interim maintenance to the wife.

Read more

Matter:-Family Matter

---

314.Const. P. 829/2003 (D.B.) M/s Pakcotco (Pvt)Ltd. V/S The Chairman C.B.R and ors. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 601

Fixation of fair rent. Petition accepted.

Read more

---

315.Const. P. 1063/2025 (D.B.) Mudasar Jilani V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 177

Given the presented facts and circumstances, the Court concludes that the Petitioner has not established sufficient grounds for intervention. Consequently, the petition and any related applications are dismissed. The Petitioner has to pursue his remedy through an appeal before the competent authority. If such an appeal has not yet been decided, it should be addressed. Following that decision, the Petitioner may then seek further recourse before the Service Tribunal.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

316.Const. P. 858/2025 (D.B.) Abdul Rauf Jetelserwala V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 593

Judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan are binding on all other courts, including High Courts, to the extent that they decide a question of law or enunciate a principle of law. All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan are obligated to act in aid of the Supreme Court, ensuring the enforcement of its judgments. As the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of all cases where the decision has been reached, the decision of the Supreme Court needs to be taken care of as directed in terms of Article 187(2) of the Constitution.

Read more

Matter:-IMPLEMENTATION

---

317.Const. P. 7544/2021 (D.B.) Aziz Ahmed and Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 535

The principle of equal pay for equal work is legally enforceable. Article 25 of the Constitution permits reasonable employee classification, provided it aligns with intended objectives. In this instance, the petitioner seeks enforcement of Sindh Government policies dated July 9, 2020, February 20, 2021, and June 2, 2020. Under Article 199, the court possesses the authority to review government policies for reasonableness if applicable in respondent university and to safeguard aggrieved parties' rights. Consequently, this petition is admissible based on established court precedents, and the respondents' objections are overruled.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

318.Criminal Appeal 613/2022 (D.B.) QADIR S/O MUHAMMAD ALAM V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1554
Matter:-LIFE IMPRISONMENT

---

319.Cr.Acctt.A 18/2022 (D.B.) MUHAMMAD SALIK NUKRICH V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: NAB

2025 SHC KHI 348

Appeals allowed.

Read more

Matter:-IMPRISONMENT ABOVE 7 YEARS

---

320.Const. P. 1294/2025 (D.B.) Khalid Abdul Maroof V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan

2025 SHC KHI 555

Pre-emptive motive. Constitutional Petitions dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

321.Cr.Bail 530/2025 (D.B.) FAHEEM SOOMRO S/O SHAMSUDDIN SOOMRO V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

322.Const. P. 905/2023 (D.B.) Fida Hussain V/S Province of Sindh & and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Matter:-Deceased Quota

---

323.Const. P. 1231/2024 (D.B.) Nizar Ali Fazwani V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 220

Coming to the case in hand, it appears that the Ayyan Ali case supra establishes that mere criminal involvement does not justify ECL placement, which confirms that citizens have a fundamental right to liberty under Article 9, which, combined with Articles 4 and 15, includes the right to travel, unless restricted by a law enacted in the public interest. Numerous judgments have affirmed that the mere registration of a crime does not constitute a "public interest" justification for restricting a person's liberty. Therefore, the Respondent's actions in placing the Petitioner's name on the ECL based on the criminal case are inconsistent with established legal principles. Consequently, this petition must be allowed

Read more

Matter:-E.C.L.

---

324.Const. P. 133/2025 (S.B.) Shaikh Faisal Habib V/S Yasir Ahmed Awan & another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 337

In the light of what has been discussed above, the instant petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Read more

Matter:-RENT MATTER

---

325.II.A. 245/2024 (S.B.) Abdul Khaliq Saleem S/o Hafiz Fateh Muhammad Khan V/S Imran Hyder Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 429

The instant Second Appeal merits no consideration and is dismissed with no order as to cost. Impugned Judgment and decree dated 23.05.2024 is upheld.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

326.M.A. 216/2024 (S.B.) Professor Dr. Syeda Azra Qamar V/S Kifayat Academy and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 578

12. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeals are allowed, Impugned orders are set aside with no order as to cost. The learned Tribunal shall decide the case on merits, without being influenced by the findings in the Impugned order, after recording of evidence of the respective parties.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

---

327.Const. P. 4/2025 (D.B.) Rizwan Ahmed V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 524

The respondent, appearing in court, informed that the Accountant General Sindh's office had issued letter No. AGS/Edu-V/Verification/2023-24/246, dated April 16, 2024, to the Secretary SE&LD, seeking the following clarifications: Firstly, the joining database was submitted to their office after a delay exceeding thirteen years, for which the department must provide an explanation. Secondly, according to the relevant Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO), the petitioner returned to duty following an eight-year absence, necessitating clarification under Sindh Civil Service Rule 33. To date, no response has been received. 4. Based on the circumstances, the respondents are required to review the issue and make a decision within a reasonable period, allowing the petitioner a hearing. 5. In view of the foregoing, without touching the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Read more

Matter:-RELEASING OF SALARY

---

328.Const. P. 756/2024 (D.B.) Muhammad Ashraf & another V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2025 SHC HYD 823

Graveyard case

Read more

Matter:-DECLARATION

---

329.Cr.Bail 173/2025 (D.B.) QASIM LIAQUAT ALI S/O LIAQUAT ALI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

330.Const. P. 671/2025 (D.B.) Ashfaq Ahmed V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 134

Judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan are binding on all other courts, including High Courts, to the extent that they decide a question of law or enunciate a principle of law. All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan are obligated to act in aid of the Supreme Court, ensuring the enforcement of its judgments. As the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of all cases where the decision has been reached, therefore the decision of the Supreme Court needs to be taken care of as directed in terms of Article 187(2) of the Constitution. 10. We must dismiss these petitions because the Supreme Court has already ruled on this.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

331.Const. P. 670/2025 (D.B.) Abdul Qayum Memon & Another V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 570

Judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan are binding on all other courts, including High Courts, to the extent that they decide a question of law or enunciate a principle of law. All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan are obligated to act in aid of the Supreme Court, ensuring the enforcement of its judgments. As the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of all cases where the decision has been reached, therefore the decision of the Supreme Court needs to be taken care of as directed in terms of Article 187(2) of the Constitution. 10. We must dismiss these petitions because the Supreme Court has already ruled on this.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

332.Const. P. 669/2025 (D.B.) Rashid Aziz V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 639

Judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan are binding on all other courts, including High Courts, to the extent that they decide a question of law or enunciate a principle of law. All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan are obligated to act in aid of the Supreme Court, ensuring the enforcement of its judgments. As the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of all cases where the decision has been reached, therefore the decision of the Supreme Court needs to be taken care of as directed in terms of Article 187(2) of the Constitution. 10. We must dismiss these petitions because the Supreme Court has already ruled on this.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

333.Const. P. 1344/2024 (D.B.) Altaf Hussain Awan V/S Govt of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 385

Coming to the main case, the concept of Proforma Promotion is to remedy the loss sustained by an employee / civil servant on account of denial of promotion upon his/her legitimate turn due to any reason but not a fault of his own. 15. To appreciate the controversy from a proper perspective, we think it appropriate to have a glance at Rule 7-A of the Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion, and Transfer) Rules, 1974

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

334.Const. P. 1156/2025 (D.B.) Muhammad Kaleem V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 633

So far as Upgradation??? is concerned, it is distinct from promotion. In Regional Commissioner Income Tax and another v. Syed Munawar Ali and others (2016 SCMR 859), the Supreme Court of Pakistan held that ???upgradation??? is not defined in the Civil Servants Act or the Rules framed thereunder. It applies to the posts and not the person occupying them. In Federal Public Service Commission v. Anwar-ul-Haq and others (2017 SCMR 890), the apex Court held that upgradation is carried out without necessarily creating posts in the relevant pay scales. It is done under a policy and a specific scheme. It is exclusively used for incumbents of isolated positions with no other advancement options, and its purpose is to overcome the issue of their stagnation and frustration. The Supreme Court's explanation from Fida Muhammad v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and others (2021 SCMR 1895), clearly distinguished between up-gradation and promotion. Promotion involves a move to a higher position with increased responsibilities and rank. Upgradation, on the other hand, provides financial relief by placing an employee in a higher pay scale, without changing their job duties or position. It's a mechanism designed to address the stagnation of employees who have remained in the same pay scale for a long time, particularly when they lack opportunities for promotion. Upgradation is a policy tool used to alleviate the hardship of long-term stagnation.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

335.Const. P. 672/2025 (D.B.) Aamir Siraj V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 493

Judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan are binding on all other courts, including High Courts, to the extent that they decide a question of law or enunciate a principle of law. All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan are obligated to act in aid of the Supreme Court, ensuring the enforcement of its judgments. As the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of all cases where the decision has been reached, therefore the decision of the Supreme Court needs to be taken care of as directed in terms of Article 187(2) of the Constitution. 10. We must dismiss these petitions because the Supreme Court has already ruled on this.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

336.Const. P. 4765/2016 (D.B.) Mst. Badar ul Nisa Bibi V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 571

Petitioner seeks employment in a Government department based on a deceased quota/son quota. The Supreme Court has already declared the same to be unlawful vide judgment dated 26.09.2024 in the case of General Post Office Islamabad vs. Muhammad Jalal (Civil Petition No.3390 of 2021). 5. In view of the foregoing, without touching the merits of the case, this petition is dismissed.

Read more

Matter:-APPOINTMENT

---

337.Const. P. 4581/2022 (D.B.) Muhammad Hassan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 631

Regularization of Project Employees

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

338.Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 217/2024 (D.B.) M/s. Ramada Industries (Pvt) Ltd., Karachi V/S The Commissioner I. R. Zone-VI, CTO, Kar. &another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sales Tax

2025 SHC KHI 466

input tax claim cannot be denied if subsequently the supplier has been suspended or blacklisted Section 21(3) and Section 8(1)(ca) interpreted

Read more

Matter:-SALES TAX.

---

339.Const. P. 519/2023 (D.B.) Muhammad Adnan V/S PTCL and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 369

Group Insurance Entitlement

Read more

Matter:-PENSIONARY BENEFITS

---

340.Const. P. 5618/2021 (D.B.) Khalid Akram & Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 474

Service Matter

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

341.Const. P. 1315/2014 (D.B.) Syed Asif Raza and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 640

Regularization of Employees of Private concerned.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

342.Const. P. 128/2025 (S.B.) Mir Mohammad Sangi Thr. Legal Heir V/S Anwar Ellhi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 100

The petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Read more

Matter:-RENT MATTER

---

343.Const. P. 3141/2024 (D.B.) M/s Pak Sun Green (Pvt) Ltd & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 269

FIA Inquiry

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST NOTICE

---

344.Const. P. 1637/2024 (D.B.) Ghulam Ghous Miani V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 606

Relieving Order

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

345.Const. P. 199/2021 (D.B.) Muhammad Faheem Khan and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 339

This Court cannot exercise its writ jurisdiction conferred by article 199 in view of the bar contained in article 212 of the Constitution.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

346.Const. P. 4649/2023 (D.B.) Muneer Ahmed Tunio V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 643

Determination of seniority

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

347.Const. P. 3251/2024 (D.B.) Mst Sarwat Ghazi V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 318

Pension Rights of Divorced Daughter

Read more

Matter:-PENSIONARY BENEFITS

---

348.Const. P. 6898/2019 (D.B.) Bhagwandas V/S M/s MCB Ltd & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: NIRC, CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973

2025 SHC KHI 139

Involving cognitive capabilities. Non-Workman.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

349.Spl.Anti.Ter.J.A. 186/2023 (D.B.) MUHAMMAD SHAFI S/O NOOR MUHAMMAD & 02 ORS V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1476
Matter:-IMPRISONMENT ABOVE 7 YEARS

---

350.Const. P. 5412/2022 (D.B.) Nisar Hussain Shaikh V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 576

Proforma Promotion

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

351.Cr.Bail 421/2025 (D.B.) ABDUL SAMEE S/O MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

352.Cr.Bail 1941/2024 (D.B.) ASAD AFTAB S/O AFTAB V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

353.Cr.Bail 142/2025 (S.B.) WARIS S/O ARSALANA V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 625
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

354.Cr.Bail 2243/2024 (S.B.) GHAZI S/O MUHAMMAD KHAN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 400
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

355.Suit 1523/2019 (S.B.) Nasreen Basit Rahman V/S Shakeel ahmed & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 185
Matter:-Suit for Specific Performance

---

356.Cr.Bail 90/2025 (S.B.) MUHAMMAD MAROOF S/O MUHAMMAD ALI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 115
Matter:-BAIL AFTER ARREST

---

357.Criminal Miscelleneous 632/2024 (S.B.) RASHID AHEMD SIDDIQUI V/S THE STATE & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

358.Criminal Appeal 258/2024 (D.B.) HAFEEZ MURAD S/O MURAD BUX V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 1145, 2025 SHC KHI 1146
Matter:-IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS

---

359.Const. P. 5661/2024 (D.B.) Sindh Club V/S Syed Muhammad Taqi Naqvi and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: CONSTITUTION OF PAKISTAN, 1973

2025 SHC KHI 202

Estoppel.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

360.Cr.Bail 198/2025 (S.B.) RAJA GABOL S/O ABDUL RASHEED GABOL V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-BAIL BEFORE ARREST/PRE ARREST BAIL

---

361.Const. P. 466/2025 (D.B.) Humayu Sultan V/S Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act, 1969

2025 SHC KHI 5

Suspension of licence of customs agent; Held: Not justified without notice and assigning of reasons; Rule 102(4) of the 2001 Rules interpreted

Read more

Matter:-CUSTOM MATTER

---

362.Cr.J.A 87/2023 (D.B.) NIAZ ALI @ ALI PATHAN S/O GHULAM NABI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 422
Matter:-IMPRISONMENT ABOVE 7 YEARS

---

363.Suit 197/2019 (S.B.) Ghulam Yaseen & others. V/S Hussainullah & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 153
Matter:-RECOVERY

---

364.Criminal Appeal 717/2024 (D.B.) DANISH S/O ZAHEERUDDIN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 417
Matter:-IMPRISONMENT ABOVE 7 YEARS

---

365.Judicial Companies Misc. 18/2024 (S.B.) OPAL LABORATORIES & Another V/S Nil Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Companies Act, 2017

Merger approved.

Read more

Matter:-MERGER

---

366.Spl.Anti.Ter.A. 82/2024 (D.B.) KHALIL KHAN S/O HABIBULLAH & ANOTHER V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 488
Matter:-IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS

---

367.Cr.Acq.A. 606/2019 (D.B.) OBAID MUHAMMAD KHAN NIAZI S/O ABDUL SATTAR V/S MUHAMMAD IQBAL & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi 2025 SHC KHI 591
Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

368.Suit 230/2019 (S.B.) Raees Didar Hussain Rind V/S Hashmat Ali & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC

Matter:-SUIT FOR DECLERATION

---

369.Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 1518/2023 (D.B.) Director, Directorat Gen., Int.& Inv (Custom) Kar. V/S Altaf Hussain & another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act, 1969 (Sections 179(3)), Custom Act, 1969 (Section 179(4))

Matter:-CUSTOM MATTER

---

370.R.A (Civil Revision) 147/2022 (S.B.) Muhammad Shafi Nagori (died thr LRs) Thr Waqar V/S Muhammad Ayoub and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC

2025 SHC KHI 245

Proprietary rights.

Read more

Matter:-AGAINST THE ORDER

---

371.Const. P. 2717/2018 (D.B.) Rizwana Akhtar and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2024 SHC KHI 978

The 2011 letter granted certain benefits. It is the Competent Authority's responsibility to determine if these benefits apply to the petitioners, based on the FST decision. This Court cannot intervene, as per the Supreme Court's ruling in Hameed Akhtar Niazi (1996 SCMR 1185). This ruling has conditions, and since the petitioners failed a qualifying exam, they cannot claim equity or this Court's jurisdiction based on the Niazi case analogy. 9. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, petitioners have not demonstrated a case for this court's intervention under Article 199 of the Constitution.

Read more

Matter:-SERVICE

---

372.F.R.A 48/2023 (S.B.) Rehman Dino S/o Khawend Dino V/S Mst. Fehmida Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:-CANTONMENT

---

373.II.A. 40/2019 (S.B.) Wapda and another V/S Kadir Bakhsh and another Sindh High Court, Karachi 2024 SHC KHI 1111
Matter:-AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT

---

374.R.A (Civil Revision) 101/1995 (S.B.) Budho Khan thr:LRs V/S Mst: Hawa and other. Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad 2024 SHC HYD 344
Matter:-Against Judgment

---

375.Const. P. 84/2023 (D.B.) Parvez Ali Khaskheli V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-EDUCATION

---

376.Const. P. 84/2023 (D.B.) Parvez Ali Khaskheli V/S P.O Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Matter:-EDUCATION

---

377.M.A. 69/2022 (S.B.) M/s. Meerut Cooperative Housing Society Ltd V/S Shahid Akhtar Qureshi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2023 SHC KHI 236

Sindhi

Read more

Matter:-COOP. HOUSING SOCIETIES

---

378.M.A. 69/2022 (S.B.) M/s. Meerut Cooperative Housing Society Ltd V/S Shahid Akhtar Qureshi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2023 SHC KHI 159

The Court interpreted the Cooperative Societies Act, 1925, and its 2020 amendment, observing that the Act primarily supports broad economic activities in agriculture, not for housing schemes of affluent and influent persons. The Court directed the Chief Secretary of Sindh to ensure the Act's effective implementation in line with its original purpose and called for educational programs Bachelor degree(s) in the subject of cooperative societies.

Read more

Matter:-COOP. HOUSING SOCIETIES

---

379.M.A. 69/2022 (S.B.) M/s. Meerut Cooperative Housing Society Ltd V/S Shahid Akhtar Qureshi and others Sindh High Court, Karachi 2023 SHC KHI 880

Urdu

Read more

Matter:-COOP. HOUSING SOCIETIES

---

380.Const. P. 1447/2020 (D.B.) Yaseen Ali Ghunio V/S Govt of Pak & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2023 SHC SUK 124

CP(D) 1447/2020 Connected with CP(D) 228/2021 - Judgment in Urdu

Read more

Matter:-Railway Bridge

---

381.Const. P. 1447/2020 (D.B.) Yaseen Ali Ghunio V/S Govt of Pak & Others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur 2023 SHC SUK 488

CP(D) 1447/2020 connected with CP(D) 228/2021 - Judgment in Sindhi

Read more

Matter:-Railway Bridge

---

382.Const. P. 6712/2020 (D.B.) M/s Telenor Microfinance Bank Ltd V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Employees Social Security Act, 2016

2021 SHC KHI 1358

Social Security for workers

Read more

Matter:-SESSI

---