ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

C. P. No. D – 1734 of 2018

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

 

1.    For orders on office objection

2.    For hearing of CMA No.8929/2018

3.    For hearing of main case

 

 

25.10.2018

 

Mr. Aayatullah Khuwaja advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Jalil Ahmed Memon advocate along with respondent No.2 Syed Amir Ali Shah.

Mr. Noor Hassan Malik Assistant Advocate General Sindh.

.................

 

We have heard the learned counsel and perused the record. Today, Mr. Jalil Ahmed Memon has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.2 as well as comments without any document. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been relieved from his duties which are neither transparent nor lawful. He was appointed by the Local Government Department and was posted in terms of order dated 10.03.2012 in TMA, Bhiria District Naushahro Feroze. On account of some misbehaviour issues with the staff and his conduct with juniors, the Chairman Town Committee was coerced to relieve him summarily from the Town Committee and has been advised to report back to Local Government which is impugned in these proceedings. Section 80 of the Sindh Local Government Act, 2013 enables a Mayor and/or a Chairman, as the case may be, to exercise, supervise and control over the acts and proceedings of all employees of the Committee and dispose of all questions relating to their service, pay privileges and allowances in accordance with the rules, provided that the service matters of the members of Sindh Local Government Unified Grade shall be referred to Government.

 

Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as clerk and he was not a unified grade employee, hence, in terms of Section 80 (c) it is the Mayor and/or Chairman to exercise supervision and control over the acts and proceedings of the employees. The impugned letter whereby he was relieved from services, is apparently within their domain and the Council itself could investigate all proceedings of the employees of the Town Committee Bhiria being not Unified Grade employee. He was allegedly relieved on account of his misbehaviour with the staff and his conduct to the juniors but he was condemned unheard. Though the para wise comments disclosed that a show-cause notice was issued but neither it was attached with the comments nor the relieving letter said it so. Presumably, this action was taken without issuing him a show-cause notice and perhaps without hearing the petitioner. Without commenting as to whether the petitioner has misbehaved or has conducted in a manner which is not justified in any manner, we deem it appropriate and with the consensus of the counsel that he may be given a show-cause notice alleging therein all the grievances and he may be given two weeks’ time to respond. On receipt of reply to the show-cause notice within two weeks, in case it is so, the petitioner will be heard and the competent authority, in accordance with law including but not limited to Section 89, shall pass appropriate orders as deem fit and proper.

 

            Petition and listed application stand disposed of in the above terms.

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                        __________________

                                                                                                   J U D G E

 

                                             __________________

           J U D G E

 

N.M.