ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

 C.P. Nos. 2424/2010, 525/2011, 832/2012, 590/2011, 1959, 1960/2010, 2600, 2575, 1696, 53/2011, 2572/2011, 1612, 2174/2010

 446/2011 & 857/2012

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

                                    1. For orders on office objection as Flag ‘A’.

                                    2. For orders on M.A.No.8747/10.

                                    3. For orders on M.A.No.8784/10.

                                    4. For Katcha Peshi.

12.9.2012

Mrs. Leela alias Kalapna Devi advocate for petitioners No.. C.P.No.2424/2010,  C.P.No.53/2011 & C.P.No.1612/2010.

                        Mr. Ghulam Mohidin Durani advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.525/2011.

Mr. Hafiz Musab Baleegh Dhamrah, advocate for petitioners in C.P.No.832/2012.

                        Mr. Ghulam Ali A. Samtio, advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.590/2011.

Mr. Rasool Bux A. Soomro advocate for petitioners in C.P.Nos.1959 & 1960/2010.

                        Mr. Ather Abbas Solangi, advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.2600/2011.

                        Mr. Sallahuddin Chandio, advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.2575/2011

                        Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.1696/2011.

Mr. Ghulam Serwar Abdullah Soomro, advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.2572/2011.

                        Mr. Irshad Ali R. Chandio, advocate for petitioner in c.P.No.2174/2010.

                        Mr. Habibullah Ghouri, advocate for petitioner in C.P.No.446/2011.

Messrs Rashid Mustafa Solangi and Muhammad Yaqoob Dahani, advocates for petitioner in C.P.No.857/2012.

Mr. Azizul Haq Solangi, Asstt. A. G assisted by Mr. Ameer Ahmed Narejo, State Counsel.

                                                            -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

            Since the common  and identical points are involved in the present petitions therefore by a common order we are deciding the present petitions.

                        The brief facts of the case are that after an advertisement by the respondents for the recruitment of posts of Assistant Sub-Inspector, the petitioners applied and after fulfilling the requisite requirements appeared and passed the written test in open competition conducted by the board comprising of respondents No.3 & 4. Thereafter the petitioners were called to appear in interview before the selection board of the then DIGP, Larkana. Petitioners appeared on 12.11.1995 along with all necessary documents and relevant record. The names of the petitioners were included in the final list of the successful candidates issued by the competent authority. However, respondents according to the learned counsel for the petitioners malafidely kept the list of the candidates secret and started appointing the persons of their choice ignoring the petitioners.

                        The orders were passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 2^nd January 2010 in Civil Appeal in Civil Appeal No.57-K, 58-K, 60-K to 97-K, 99-K to 108-K/2009 whereby by consent of  (the then) Addl. A. G Sindh, the Honourable Supreme Court under the instructions of IGP Sindh formed the committee consisting of Messrs Bashir Ahmed Memon, Sanaullah Abbasi and Abdul Khalique Shaik, all DIGP to enquire the letters and verify the documents and recommend the appointments. Today learned counsel for the petitioners has placed on record an order passed in Civil Petition for leave to Appeal No.15-K/2012 passed on 03.5.2012, wherein the Addl. A. G Sindh had opposed the prayer on the ground that the matter is of past and closed one and the Committee had already made recommendations about a year ago and now no one else can be accommodated. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in its order dated 02.5.2012 in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.15-K/2012 in paragraph No.4 of the order has observed as under:

“In our opinion, as some of the batch mates of the Petitioner have been entertained by the department, then at-least the Petitioner should be given a similar chance. Consequently, we would direct the Respondents to examine the Petitioner and subject him to the same tests as those undergone by his batch mates including medical and thereafter place their report before this Court.”

                        Mr. Azizul Haq Solangi, learned Asstt. A. G has opposed the petitions fixed today on the ground that the petitions are hit by latches. According to him respondents No.1 & 2, SSP and DIGP Larkana in their comments have already stated that most of the petitioners are not qualified and have failed in the written test as well as in interview. He further submits that the committee has already recommended the cases of genuine candidates a year ago.

                        We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Asstt. A. G who is assisted by Mr. Ameer Ahmed Narejo and perused the record available before us as well as un reported orders/judgment of the apex Court. We have already decided C.P.Nos. D-1600, 1608,  1679, 1800, 1897, 1835, 1993, 2057, 2106, 2139, 2244, 2331, 2360, 2413 of 2010, 24, 25, 92, 425,  472, 142, 145, 146, 294, 723,  1287, 1956,  of 2011 & C.P.No.D-195 of 2012. vide order dated 09.8.2012 which are identical and similar to the present petitions on the basis of the dictum laid down by the apex Court in similar and identical cases already referred to above. We, therefore, direct the respondents to examine the cases of the petitioners and in case they are found fit and eligible they may be considered for the said posts, otherwise submit detailed report before this Court. This exercise shall be done within three months time.

Judge

                                                                                    Judge