ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Constt: Petition.No.D-1195 of 2012.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

Before:

Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah,

 Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi,

For hearing of main case.

23.11.2021

                        Mr. Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate for the petitioner.

                        Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, A.A.G Sindh

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as Primary School Teacher by Executive District Officer (Education) Larkana, in year 2010; on joining of service, initially he was paid salaries for three months; he was transferred from one to other School and has also performed ancillary duties and still is serving his department but is not being paid his salaries. By contending so, he sought for directions against the respondents to release the salaries to the petitioner. In support of his contentions, he has relied upon case of Muhammad Akhtar Shirani and others Vs. Punjab Text Book Board and others (2004 SCMR-1077).

                        Learned A.A.G Sindh by referring to the comments filed by District Education Officer Larkana has contended that all the documents relating to the appointment of the petitioner as Primary School Teacher and his subsequent posting are fake and bogus. By contending so, he has sought for dismissal of the instant constitutional petition.

                        We have considered above arguments and perused the record.

                        No salary could be ordered to be paid on the basis of appointment order, which is alleged to be fake and bogus. Even otherwise, the appointment order of the petitioner with subsequent documents being fake or bogus or genuine is involving factual controversy, could not be resolved by this Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction.

                        The case law, which is relied up by learned counsel for the petitioner is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In that case, the issue of illegal appointment was involved. In the instant case, the very appointment is alleged to be fake and bogus. Fake and bogus document does not create right.

                        In view of above, the instant constitutional petition is dismissed accordingly.

  J U D G E

J U D G E