ORDER SHEET
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANO
Constt. Petition No. D- 223 of 2022
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
FOR NON-PROSECUTION
06.12.2023.
Mr. Nizam-ul-Din Bhutto, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Additional Advocate General, Sindh
---------
Instant petition has been listed by the office today for non- prosecution on the ground that counsel for the petitioner has failed to provide requisite sets and process fee to the office. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time for compliance.
We have gone through the averments made under the petition as well its prayer clause and found that the petitioners have claimed their appointment in terms of policy framed by Sindh Government which was subject to the agreement between the Donor as well as the Province of Sindh and later such judgment was passed by this Court which too attained finality. Learned Additional Advocate General, Sindh also opposes the petition and submits that keeping instant petition alive on record will fruit nothing as it is hit by latches. In support of his contention he places reliance upon an unreported judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Petition No.186–K of 2013 re: Muhammad Arif and others v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary and others and its esteemed judgment dated 1.4.2015 he while rebutting with the contention refers to Para-4 of said judgment, therefore, prayed that the petition in hand has become infructuous and seeks its disposal.
Before parting with the order we deem it appropriate to reproduce Para-04 of said judgment passed by learned Apex Court which reads as under:-
“The record shows that certain appointments were undoubtedly made but on the orders of the Court. It further transpires that such orders were made with consent of the counsel representing the Department. However, the learned counsel was unable to refer to any judgment of the High Court which had allowed the petition of the successful candidates on merits. The consent order obviously cannot be cited as precedent, more so when the scrapping of the examination was maintained by the High Court. Additionally, the Constitution Petition suffered from latches. By now, almost 8 years have passed by when the selection was made and it is too late in the day to direct the appointment of the petitioners. The petition is, therefore, dismissed and leave declined.”
Sd/-Nasir-ul-Mulk, CJ.
Sd/- Anwar Zaheer Jamali, J.
Sd/- Maqbool Baqar, J.”
Accordingly and in view of above legal position instant petition has become infructuous, same is hereby dismissed along with pending applications (if any).
[
J U D G E
J U D G E
S-Ashfaq/*