ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Constt. Petition No.D-2680 of 2010

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

           

                          

                           For hearing of main case

                                               

19-04-2018

 

                      Mr. Noor Hassan Malik, Assistant Advocate General

                           12-09-2014

                                                 .-.-.-. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

                                                 

               Through present petition, petitioner is seeking relief that necessary direction be issued to official respondents to provide job of chowkidar to the petitioner, because he has donated a plot of land to official respondents for building and running Government Girls Primary School Manzoor Bhatti, situated at Village Haji Gul Muhammad, Deh Dhukar, UC Faqeerabad,  Taluka Kot Diji, District Khairpur.

               This issue has already been decided in number of constitutional petitions by following the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.19-K to 50-K of 2015.

               The principle that has been laid down and is to be followed after a close examination of these decisions and particularly that of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is, that a public office even that of naib qasid, chowkidar (guard), a peon or a sanitary worker can not be a part of consideration for a land donation or any other transaction and even if the same is so made under any policy or representation by the officials, then the same (policy and / or representation) is illegal. Another reported judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court – 1997 SCMR 855, was followed in the above referred decision of Hon’ble Apex Court. In one of the constitutional petitions; CP No.D-28 of 2011 earlier decided by this Court, the petitioner has appended a letter from the respondent No.1 to support his contention that in lieu of donation of plot, the donor is entitled to recommend his family member for a government job. It was held, that the said correspondence of 06.01.2009, in the light of the above judicial pronouncement has no sanctity in the eyes of law and is void abinitio, being against the public policy and is adversely affected by section 23 of the Contract Act, 1872. Similarly, the correspondence / circular of 08.05.2008, as relied upon by petitioner has no legal effect, in view of the above discussion.

               Before parting with this order, it is necessary to observe that job opportunity to the petitioner will not be refused simply on account of this decision, but his case can be assessed and examined by the official respondents in accordance with rules and recruitment policy as well as on merits, but obviously, without considering the fact of plot donation. Similarly, as also already held in the earlier referred decision of this Court pronounced by the learned Division Bench, that for a claim of compensation or mesne profits, the petitioner can avail the remedy provided under the law and if a jurisdiction of competent forum / authority or Court is invoked, then the cases of such persons/ petitioners would be decided accordingly and strictly within the parameters of law.

               The upshot of the above is that the above constitutional petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs.

 

                                                                                                    JUDGE

 

                                                             JUDGE

 

 

Suleman Khan/PA