ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Constt: Petitions Nos.947, 850 of 2008, 1469, 1009, 1010, 946, 919, 851, 852, 849 , 861, 1475,982, 1573, 1939, 1844, 1028, 865, 1485, 391, 390, 884, 1139, 948, 1466, 1467, 1474, 882, 884, 847, 921, 1473, 1471, 139, 2156, 1187, 873, 1022, 511, 1804, 392, 393, 1224, 1383, 913, 986, 978, 977, 975, 973, 955, 952, 951, 950, 949, 944, 943, 867, 864, 860, 740, 941, 956, 953, 880, 885 of 2010 & 599, 1390, 1335, 1268, 1176, 1266, 609, 1079, 936, 1217, 1392, 1284     of   2011.

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

For Hearing of M.A.No.315/2012.

16.3.2012.

                        Mr. Faiz Mohammad Larik, advocate for the petitioner.

                        Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Addl: A.G.

=======

Through  this application one of the petitioner has stated that the decision given in this petition is not being implemented .

                        Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, learned A.A.G, points out that as per decision of this Court, any person, who is aggrieved by selection and appointment process, has to apply to the District Recruitment Committee (D.R.C) and then in the light of the decision the complaint was to be examined and if  required   merit list was to be revised within parameters  of decision of this petition.  In the circumstances,  the petitioner in this case  and all other petitioners in connected petitions, if they have any grievance,  are directed to apply to the D.R.C  with their  grievance so that any violation in the process of selection and appointment could have been scrutinized in the light of this decision.

                        With these  directions, application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

                                                                                    JUDGE