IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH

CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

 

Present:

Irshad Ali Shah, J.

Agha Faisal,J.

 

CP D945 of 2015                 :           Asif Ali Sarki and others vs.

Federation of Pakistan & Others

 

For the Petitioner                 :           Mr.Riaz Hussain Khoso, Advocate

 

For the Respondents          :           Mr. Muhammad Imran Abbasi

                                                            Assistant Attorney General

                                               

Dates of hearing                  :           19.01.2022

 

Date of announcement      :           19.01.2022

 

 

ORDER

 

Agha Faisal, J.     The present petition has been filed seeking regularization of daily wages / contractual / temporary employees, services whereof long since been dispensed with by the respondent.

 

2.            Petitioners' counsel submitted that the services of the petitioners merited regularization in such regard placed reliance upon Shoaib Ali[1]. Learned AAG pointed out that there was no law to merit such a claim as regular employment was only merited through an advertised regular recruitment process.

 

3.            Heard and perused. Admittedly, there is no demonstrable existing relationship between the parties. Perusal of the respondents' comments demonstrates that the petitioners had been engaged temporarily on contract and such engagement had expired. It has also been stated that notwithstanding the fact that there exists no law to sanction regularization of the petitioners, the same is also unmerited as regular employment with the respondent ought only to be predicated against an advertised regular recruitment process. Petitioners' reliance upon Shoaib Ali is unmerited inter alia as it appears to be a consent order[2] and most importantly the judgment pertains to changing of the nature of employment from regular to contingency, which is certainly not the case articulated before us[3]. Therefore, it appears safe to observe that the petitioners’ counsel has been unable to demonstrate any entitlement of the petitioners to the relief claimed.

 

4.            The august Supreme Court has maintained in Khushal Khan[4] that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to revive, amend or alter contracts; there was no vested right to seek regularization for employees hired on contractual basis unless there was legal and statutory basis for the same; contractual  employees  had  no  automatic  right  to  be regularized unless the same has specifically been provided for in a law; and that the relationship of contractual employees is governed by principles of master and servant.

 

          A Division Bench of this Court has held in Anjum Badar[5] that contractual employees had no vested right for regular appointment or to seek regularization of their services, hence, were debarred from invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court.

 

5.            It is settled law that contractual employees are devoid of any generic entitlement for regularization[6]. Petitioners’ counsel has been unable to identify any specific law conferring any right upon the petitioners to be considered for regularization[7]. It is, thus, our deliberated view that the petitioners have failed to set forth a case for exercise of the discretionary[8] writ jurisdiction of this Court.

 

6.            In view hereof, we are constrained to observe that the petition is misconceived, hence, is hereby dismissed.

 

                                                                   JUDGE

 

JUDGE

         


[1]Shoaib Ali & Others vs. Federation of Pakistan & Others (CP D 2662 of 2015); Judgment dated 04.02.2020.

[2] Per paragraph 4. No consent is manifest in the present circumstances.

[3] Per paragraph 14.

[4]Per Ijaz ul Ahsan J in Khushal Khan Khattak University & Others vs. Jabran Ali Khan & Others reported as 2021 SCMR 977.

[5]Per Nadeem Akhtar J in Anjum Badar vs. Province of Sindh & Othersreported as PLD 2021 Sindh 328.

[6]Per Ijaz ul Ahsan J in Govt of KPK vs. Jawad Ali & Others reported as 2021 SCMR 185; Per Mansoor Ali Shah J in Province of Punjab vs. Dr. Javed Iqbal reported as 2021 SCMR 767; Per Ijaz ul Ahsan J in Owais Shams Durrani vs. Vice Chancellor Bacha Khan University reported as 2020 SCMR 2041; Per Miangul Hassan Aunrangzeb J in First Womens Bank vs. Muhammad Tayyab reported as 2020 PLC (C.S.) 86.

[7]Per Ijaz ul Ahsan J in Govt of KPK Welfare Board vs. Raheel Ali Gohar & Others  reported as 2020 SCMR 2068;

[8] Per Ijaz Ul Ahsan J. in Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani vs. PBC & Others reported as 2021 SCMR 425; Muhammad Fiaz Khan vs. Ajmer Khan & Another reported as 2010 SCMR 105.