ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Constt: Petition.No.D-70 of 2015.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

01. For orders on office objection “A”.

02. For order on maintainability of main case.

09.03.2022

                        M/S. Ghulam Dastagir Shahani & Muhammad Afzal Jagirani,

Advocate(s) for the petitioners.

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

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents be directed to ensure release of outstanding and future salaries to the petitioners, as they have been appointed as Cook and Sanitary Worker by them, after observing the codal formalities.

                        Learned A.A.G Sindh while making reference to the comments filed on 11.02.2020, by the Principal, Government Degree College, Kandhkot, has sought for dismissal of instant constitutional petition by contending that the petitioners were appointed on contract basis for period of three years; they were given a chance to appear in interview for further appointment; which they did not avail; therefore, no right has arisen in their favour to claim release of outstanding and future salaries.

                        Heard arguments and perused the record.

                        Admittedly, the appointment of the petitioners was on contact basis; it was for period of three years and such period has since expired a decade ago. If for the sake of arguments, it is believed that the petitioners have not been paid the salaries for the work, which they have done being contractual employee; even then they could not ask for release of their outstanding salaries by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Nothing has been brought on record by the petitioners, which may suggest that either they have been regularized in their service or their contract period has been extended, which may justify this Court to direct the respondents to release their future salaries.

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

           JUDGE