ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P No.D- 3449 of 2013

______________________________________________________

Date                        Order with signature of Judge

Present

Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar

Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar

Shahryar Abro Talpur                     ………..…             Petitioner

V E R S U S

The Ministry of Communication,

& others                                           ……………            Respondents

Date of hearing 11.05.2016

Mr. Ali Asadullah Bullo advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Ghulam Haider Shaikh Advocate for Respondent No.2

Shaikh Liaqat Hussain Standing Counsel.

-------------------------

Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J: Initially, one petitioner has filed this application in which he has prayed that the Respondents have illegally discontinued the services of the petitioner instead of regularizing him in terms of the office memorandum and minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Sub-committee for regularizing of contract/daily wages employees in the Ministries/ Division/attached autonomous bodies/ Organizations which were circulated on March, 15^th 2013. 

2.      Learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to page 117 of the court file (Annexure C-6) in which the Cabinet Sub-committee also discussed the case of 110 contract/daily wages employees of NHA and approved in principle the regularization of these employees as special case and also directed that these employees should be regularized on completion of one year contract service or three spells of 89 days as daily wages. 

3.      Learned Standing Counsel has filed statement on 24.02.2016 with which he has attached a letter of Section Officer, Establishment Division, Cabinet Secretariat, Government of Pakistan in which he has given the reference of this petition and states that in pursuance of the order passed by learned Islamabad High Court, Islamabad, a committee for regularization of service of contract employees has been constituted with the approval of Prime Minister of Pakistan. He has also attached a Notification dated 02.04.2015 in which the terms of reference are also mentioned with the names of committee members. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the matter may be referred to this Committee for the purpose of scrutinizing and considering the case of petitioner for his claim of regularization. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2/N.H.A is also of the same view so that matter may be resolved.

4.       At this juncture, we would like to point out that the counsel for the petitioner filed three miscellaneous applications under Order I Rule 10 C.P.C for impleading few more petitioners who have same grievance and they are also at par with the case of the petitioner. Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and learned Standing Counsel both have no objection if interveners are impleaded in this case as petitioners. By consent, CMA Nos. 29881 of 2013, 1408 of 2014 and 30058 of 2015 are allowed and the interveners are impleaded petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioner may file amended title in the office. 

5.      As a result of above discussion, the petition is disposed of by consent with the directions to the Respondents to forward the case of the petitioners to the committee in terms of Notification dated 02.04.2015 so that they may decide the matter in accordance with law.

                                                                             JUDGE

                                                JUDGE

Aadil Arab