ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P No.D- 4921 of 2015

______________________________________________________

Date                        Order with signature of Judge

Present

Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar

Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar

Shamsuddin & others                     ………..…             Petitioners

V E R S U S

The Province of Sindh & others      ……………            Respondents

Date of hearing 30.05.2016

Mr. Imtiaz Mansoor Solangi advocate for petitioners.

Mr. Sibtain Mehmood A.A.G a/w Ms. Rakhshanda Waheed State Counsel.

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

Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J: The case of the Petitioners is that on assessing their qualification, length of service and good conduct including eligibility and fitness, they were promoted from the post of P.S.T., J.S.T. to H.S.T. in B.S-19. It is further mentioned in para-1 of the petition that Petitioners are civil servant and permanent employees of Education Department for last many years. To a question raised by this court that the Petitioners are admittedly civil servant then how this petition is maintainable? Learned counsel argued that since the salaries of the Petitioners are stopped, therefore, they have approached this Court despite the fact that payment of salary is also one of the terms and conditions of the service.  

2.      Learned A.A.G. pointed out page 23 and onward of the memo of petition which are basically minutes of meeting conducted regarding the irregularities in hiring process and adjustment of salaries in Education Department. Learned A.A.G. argued that the minutes cannot be challenged in this Constitution Petition and it is the prerogative of the concerned department to look into the irregularities if any committed in the appointment and promotion process. Secondly, he argued that for the purpose of salaries, proper course is to make representation to the concerned quarter for releasing of salaries if it is not paid. While learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that despite promotion in B.S-16 in the year 2011, the petitioners are forced to work in B.S-14 and even the salaries for the B.S-14 is not being paid.   

3.      Keeping in view the bar contained under Article 212 of the Constitution, this petition is not maintainable. However, learned counsel for the petitioners after arguing at some length, agrees that the petitioners will file representation with all grievances to the concerned department and if the same is not decided in accordance with law within stipulated period of time, the remedy is available to the petitioners to invoke the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

                                                                             JUDGE

                                                JUDGE

 Aadil Arab