IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT

LARKANA

Constitutional Petition No. D-  1054 of 2022.

Present:

                                                            Mr. Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar.

                                                            Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro.

Ghulam Shabir Chandio.                                                     …………….Petitioner.

Versus

Province of Sindh

& others.                                                                                …..…..….Respondents.

            Mr. Wakeel Ali Shaikh, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Muhammad Ashique Dhamraho, Advocate for respondent No.4 along with Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Rahpoto CMO K.N. Shah.

Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Additional Advocate General.

Date of hearing:        06.12.2023.

Date of Judgment:    06.12.2023.

Judgment

Muhammad Saleem Jessar, J-. The petitioner named above, though this petition has prayed as under:

(a) To declare the impugned letter No. MC/KN SHAH/ (GB) 299, dated 01.08.2019 issued by the then Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Committee K.N. Shah,  relieving the petitioner to report to Secretary to Government of Sindh, Local Government Sindh, Karachi, as illegal, unlawful, without justification and against principles of natural justice.

(b) To set aside the impugned order/ letter No. MC/KN SHAH/ (GB) 299, dated 01.08.2019.  

            2.         The case of the petitioner is that he is employee of Local Government Department; serving as Sanitary Worker/ Helper BPS-01 and was posted in Taluka Municipal Administration K.N. Shah (District Dadu). It is further case of the petitioner that vide impugned letter the petitioner along with 11 other employees of Municipal Committee K.N. Shah was relieved to Secretary to Government of Sindh, Local Government Department Sindh, Karachi. However, later on the relieving order in respect of other 11 employees was withdrawn/ cancelled by the Chief Municipal Officer M.C Khairpur Nathan Shah.

            3.         Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, the petitioner was relived due to malafide intention and motives and personal grudge of the concerned officer and the petitioner being a low paid employee has to suffer a lot due to his relieving from Larkana to Karachi. Learned counsel further added that, the impugned order/ letter in respect of other 11 employees of the same Municipal Committee was withdrawn/ canceled, but the same remained intact in respect of the petitioner. Per learned counsel this action on the part of respondents is against natural justice and rule of parity.

            4.         Conversely, learned counsel for respondent No.4, stated that the petitioner is not punctual in his duties, therefore, he was relieved to head office and that the relieving order in respect of other employees was recalled and withdrawn, only when those employees executed undertaking to the effect that they would be punctual and regular in their duties.

            5.         When, confronted with above position, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is also ready and willing to execute such undertaking, to which the counsel for respondent No.4 submits that, as and when the petitioner executes an undertaking, it will be considered in accordance with  rule of parity.  The learned counsel for the petitioner shows his satisfaction to above proposition and seeks disposal of the petition. The petition stands disposed of accordingly in the above terms.

Judge

                                  Judge

Ansari