Order Sheet

Order Sheet.

HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIRT COURT HYDERABAD.

Present:

1. Mr. Justice Amir Hani Muslim.

2. Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali Sheikh.

C.P.NO.D-369 OF 2009.

Date Order with signature of Judge

05.11.2009.

FOR KATCHA PESHI.

Mr. S. Muhammad Saulat Rizvi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jawed I. Bukhari, Advocate for the Respondents.

. . . .

Through the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed as under:-

"Under these circumstances, it is humbly prayed by the petitioner above named that this Honourable Court may be pleased to set aside the impugned order of compulsory retirement (Annexure P/6) as the same is based on ulterior motive and colourful exercise of power and reinstate him with all back benefits and grant any other relief as deemed just and proper."

From the pleadings, it appears that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Lineman in HESCO and subsequently was promoted as Lineman-II. On 26.6.2003, the petitioner was issued an explanation by the HESCO authorities, inter alia, on the ground that he has not joined the duty after receipt of the transfer order from Jamshoro to Sujawal and has remained absent from duty w.e.f. 16.6.2003 to 26.6.2003 without previous sanction. The petitioner submitted his reply to the explanation stating therein that during such period he was seriously ill and was confined to bed. The petitioner pleaded that without taking into consideration his reply to show cause notice and without conducting regular inquiry he was compulsorily retired from his services vide order dated 30.9.2003, passed by Respondent No.2, which order has been impugned in these proceedings.

The Respondents filed their comments in which they have taken the plea that after issuance of show cause notice the petitioner was provided personal hearing and subsequently on 16.9.2003, he submitted a written application to the Respondent No.2 with a request that he may be retired from service on the ground that he was not in a position to discharge his duties. On 30.9.2003 the Respondent No.2 passed the impugned order of compulsory retirement from service. It is contended that since the petitioner has received his all pensionary and other benefits, this petition merits dismissal.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the impugned order had been passed without conducting regular inquiry, which was mandatory requirement of the law. He further contended that the petitioner had been condemned unheard and was not afforded the opportunity of personal hearing. He further contended that the impugned order is illegal, void and abinitio.

From the perusal of the record, it appears that during departmental proceedings the petitioner had submitted a written application to the Respondent No.2, with the request that he may be retired from the service on the ground that he was not in a position to discharge his duties properly. Such application has been placed on record. The Respondents had also placed on record certain documents, which show that the petitioner had received his entire pensionary and other benefits from the Respondents. Such version of the Respondents' counsel found support from the contents of the petition. Admittedly, the impugned order was passed on 30.9.2003 and the petitioner had availed all the pensionary and other benefits on retirement and he remained mum for four long years and did not agitate his grievance before any forum. No explanation for laches has been offered by the petitioner either in the petition or otherwise. The petition has been filed after an inordinate delay of about four years without furnishing any plausible explanation for the laches.

This petition for the aforesaid reasons was dismissed by us by our short order dated 05.11.2009.

J U D G E