ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI.

C.P.No.D-1655 of 2015

____________________________________________

DATE: ORDER WITH SIGNATURE(S) OF JUDGE(S).

_______________________________________________

1. For orders on office objection No.6.

2. For hearing of main case.

3. For hearing of Misc. No.7145/2015.

11.01.2016

Mr. Hakim Ali Shar, Advocate for the Petitioners.

Mr. Sibtain Mehmood, A.A.G.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners have approached this Court for declaration that all staff members/officers are entitled for getting cash rewards. Further directions have been sought against the respondents to prepare the fresh list including the names of the petitioners and disburse the cash rewards amongst them.

The brief facts of the case are that the Secretary to Government of Sindh, Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Department, Karachi sent a summary to the Chief Minister Sindh for approval of cash rewards of outstanding performance to the staff of Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Department. After sanction of the amount, the Chief Secretary Sindh vide Notification dated 17.09.2014 constituted a Committee for scrutiny of the employees eligible for the rewards against their outstanding performance in the collection of taxes and detection of narcotics and other outstanding performance during the year 2013-14. The Committee was comprising Secretary, Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Department, Government of Sindh (Chairman), Special Secretary (Budget), Finance Department, Government of Sindh (Member), Additional Secretary (S-II), SGA&CD, Government of Sindh (Member) and Director General, Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Department, Government of Sindh (Member). The grievance of the petitioner is that they have been discriminated and not provided equal treatment while other officers have been given reward money. Learned counsel also shown us a letter dated 10.04.2014, which he produced in the Court to show that Petitioner No.3 (Najeeb Ahmed Turk) was accommodated for the reasons that his name could not be included in the list due to clerical error/oversight in the recommendation. While the learned counsel also invited our attention to pages No.33 to 37, these are the copies of the applications submitted by the petitioners No.1, 4 & 5 to the Secretary, Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Department, Government of Sindh. In these applications request was made for accommodating the said petitioners so that they may also be allowed the cash rewards as allowed to other employees of the same department. So far as the petitioner No.2 is concerned, learned counsel argued that he had also moved application, but, copy is not attached with this petition.

Learned A.A.G. pointed out the comments filed by the Secretary, Excise, Taxation and Narcotics Department, Government of Sindh. The basic plea in the comments is that the cash rewards and certificates were to be given to those staff members only who had shown best performance in the tax recovery, detection of narcotics crime and other assignments. It was communicated to the employees that their cases may be recommended by the controlling authority, however, in response to para 5, it is mentioned that the case of petitioners No.3 & 5 have been recommended while the fact regarding pending applications mentioned in para 6 of the petition had not been denied or controverted in the comments. Since it is the policy matter and the reward was to be given on proper recommendation and consideration of case of each individual in relation to his efforts and performance, therefore, it is the domain of the competent authority to decide whether the present petitioners are entitled for the similar treatment and or the cash reward or not. For this purpose their cases have to be scrutinized and examined on case to case basis, the learned A.A.G argued that rewards cannot be claimed as vested rights, however, if the applications are pending that will be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.

In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with the directions to respondent No.3 to decide the pending applications of the petitioners No.1, 2 & 4 in accordance with law within a period of two months. In case the petitioners found aggrieved, they may seek appropriate remedy, available to them under the law.

Judge

Manzoor