ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

C.P.No.D-3552 of 2011

___________________________________________________________

Order with signature of Judge

  1. For orders on office objection No.1
  2. For Katcha Peshi

20.01.2014

Mr.Ghulam Shabbir Babar, advocate for petitioner

Mr.Asif Mangi, Standing Counsel

………

            Petitioner has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this court for implementation of order dated 19.02.2011 passed by FST in Appeal No.1463(R)CS/2010, in which the Tribunal observed that appellant was terminated from service for the reason that he had failed to qualify the departmental examination in two attempts. Learned counsel placed a Notification on record showing that some of officials on similar basis have been reinstated hence case of petitioner was disposed of with the directions to respondent to consider case of petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel pointed out comments in which it is clearly mentioned that in pursuance of Sacked Employees (Reinstatement) Ordinance, 2009, petitioner was reinstated as Assistant Director. He was nominated to undergo mandatory course but despite availing two chances, he could not qualify. Show cause notice was also issued to him. It is further stated that in compliance of FST order, case of petitioner was considered and since he was not eligible hence he was informed accordingly. Copy of Memorandum dated 31.03.2011 is also attached with the comments in which it is also mentioned that case of petitioner is not identical with other employees and competent authority after re-examination stood by earlier decision and appellant could not be reinstated in service. This re-examination was conducted in view of FST’s order as shown in the comments as well as Memorandum attached thereto. Relief granted by FST was only to consider case of petitioner and that has been done by competent authority and if petitioner has any grievance, he may approach to competent forum in accordance with law as no relief of reinstatement can be granted to petitioner in this case which is otherwise barred under Art. 212 of the Constitution. Petition is dismissed accordingly.

 

                                                                                      J U D G E

                                                                                    J U D G E