ORDER SHEET

HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

_______________________________

C.P. No.D-4399 of 2013.

Date

Order with Signature of Judge

For Katcha Peshi.

22.5.2015.

Mr. Jamil Ahmed Virk, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Abdul Jalil Zubedi, A.A.G.

---------------------------

The petitioner has prayed that the respondents be directed to appoint him as Junior Clerk or any other post equivalent to Junior Clerk on son quota basis.

The facts of the case are that the deceased father of the petitioner Liaquat Hussain Qureshi was serving as Office Superintendent in SSP South Karachi Office. The petitioner approached many times for his appointment on the basis of deceased son quota but he received no reply from the respondents. On behalf of respondent No.4, the Incharge Training & Recruitment Karachi Range has submitted comments. In para-8 of the comments it is mentioned as under:-

“Nevertheless, the process of recruitment is under way, the petitioners as well as all rest of the applicants shall be considered equally without any distinction or discrimination on open merit basis, and finalized at the earliest as soon as the vacancies are allocated for Son Quota”.

Learned A.A.G. argued that the respondents have made it clear in para-8 that the petitioner will be considered with equal opportunity without any discrimination and his request for appointment on deceased son quota will be finalized at the earliest as soon as the vacancies are allocated for the son quota.

Counsel for the petitioner is satisfied with this statement but he submits that some time may be fixed for considering the application of the petitioner as the matter is being delayed and cannot be left unattended for an unlimited period. Learned A.A.G. submits that it is clearly mentioned in para-5 of the same comments of the Police Department that they have received more than 2200 applications for appointment on deceased son quota, so he requests that reasonable time may be given for consideration of application of the petitioner. The petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner for appointment within a period of four (04) months.

JUDGE

Arif

ORDER SHEET

HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

_______________________________

C.P. No.D-3719 of 2013.

Date

Order with Signature of Judge

1. For order on office objection.

2. For Katcha Peshi.

3. For hearing of Misc. No.24263/2013.

22.5.2015.

Mr. Abdul Salam Memon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Abdul Jalil Zubedi, A.A.G.

Syed Zakir Ali Shah. Special Secretary, Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh. ---------------------------

Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged suspension order issued under section 4 of the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Sindh Ordinance, 2000 on 16.5.2013. The matter was transferred to the Service Tribunal by the learned Scrutiny Bench in view of order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ali Azhar Khan Baloch v. Province of Sindh & others in Civil Review Petition No.193/2013. However, vide order dated 23.4.2015 the Sindh Service Tribunal refused to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that no appeal lies against suspension order before the Tribunal and returned back the matter to this court for further proceedings.

It is clear position of law that suspension order under section 4 of the RSO is not appealable. However, any penalty imposed under section 3 may be challenged through Departmental representation/appeal under section 9 and thereafter aggrieved employee may file appeal before the Service Tribunal under section 10. We have to see whether we can exercise jurisdiction in the case of civil servants which jurisdiction is barred under Article 212 of the Constitution. Learned counsel referred the case of Mushtaq Ahmed Sabtro v. Federation of Pakistan 2001 PLC (C.S) 623.

Syed Zakir Ali Shah, Special Secretary, Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh present in court submits that proceedings against the petitioner have been completed and the competent authority will pass a final order within the period of one month positively. The letters of law made it very much clear that against the final order, the petitioner may file departmental appeal/representation and thereafter if he is found aggrieved, he may also approach to the Tribunal but at this moment there is no order in field, therefore, he cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the tribunal. The Additional Secretary clearly states that within one month final order will be passed without any fail. On his undertaking the petition is disposed of accordingly as we are also sanguine of the fact that suspension order cannot continue for an unlimited period but in this case it was issued on 06^th May, 2013 but no progress has been made in this case. Counsel for the petitioner is satisfied.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE

Arif

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI.

C. P. No.D-2061 of 2014

______________________________________________________

DATED: ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE.

____________________________________________________________

1. For Katcha-Peshi.

2. For hearing of CMA No.9627/14

21^st May, 2015

Malik Naeem Iqbal, Advocate for the Petitioners.

Mr. Abdul Jalil Zubedi, A.A.G. along with Mr. Muhammad Ali, Assistant Commissioner, Mirpur Sakro representing Deputy Commissioner, Thatta.

--------------------

The case of the Petitioners is that they are performing their duties on contract basis. The nomenclature of post of each Petitioner is already mentioned in the title of the petition i.e. Deputy District Officer, Computer Operators, Drivers and Sanitary Worker. They have approached this Court for the directions against the Respondents to regularize their services and continue to pay their salaries.

Learned A.A.G. filed comments of the Respondent No.5 (Deputy Commissioner, Thatta) in which most of the averments made in the petition have been admitted. In response to para-5, the Deputy Commissioner further stated that Respondent No.2 requested to provide list of employees working in the office of Respondent No.5 on contract basis, which was submitted accordingly but the Respondent No.5 is not competent authority to regularize services of the Petitioners. He further admitted that the salaries of the Petitioners were stopped due to non-availability of funds with the Respondent No.5, however, it is clearly mentioned that this is domain of the Respondents No.1 and 2 to regularize the service of the Petitioners.

Learned counsel for the Petitioners argued that the Petitioners are performing their contractual obligations hence they are entitled to be regularized in view of Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013. He further argued that this court has already decided similar controversy in the case of Dr. Iqbal Jan & others Vs. Province of Sindh & others reported in 2014 P L C (C.S) 1153 authored by one of us (Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J), in which Section 3 of the aforesaid Act was dealt with and finally the petition was allowed in terms of para-10 of the Judgment. He further argued that the Judgment of Dr. Iqbal Jan & others was challenged by the Government of Sindh in the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan but the said appeal was withdrawn and the Judgment holds the field.

Learned A.A.G. argued that the Government of Sindh has already constituted Committee for the purposes of regularization of various contractual employees and he has no objection if this petition is disposed of in terms of Judgment passed in the case of Dr. Iqbal Jan & others (supra). He also admits in view of the comments of the Deputy Commissioner that the list was submitted by Respondent No.5 to the Respondent No.2 in relation to the contractual employees (supra).

In view of the above, this petition is disposed of in terms of para-10 of the case of Dr. Iqbal Jan & others.

Judge

Riaz/P.A/*