Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan

Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan
Mr.Justice Gulzar Ahmed

Cinque Terre

Honourable Chief Justice
Mr. Justice Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh

Cinque Terre

Honourable Chairman I.T. Committee
Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar

Latest Case Law (Approved For Reporting)
1 . Const. P. 2201/2021 Irshad Ali Rajpar V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Contractual obligations cannot be enforced through a writ petition
Read more

Matter:OUT STANDING DUES

2 . Const. P. 5549/2021 Prof: Dr. Muhammad Zahid V/S Fed: Urdu Uni of Arts & Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
whether the directives contained in paragraph 10 of the order dated 28.04.2021 passed by this Court in CP No.D-5205/2020 has been adhered to in its letter and spirit or otherwise
Read more

Matter:DIRECTION

3 . Const. P. 4884/2020 Ghulam Murtaza V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153256 ]
Matter:BID

4 . Const. P. 2511/2021 Inspector Syed Saeed Akhtar Naqvi and Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153260 ]
At this juncture, learned AAG contends that there is another judgment i.e. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Punjab Lahore etc. v. Ms. Shamim Usman (Civil Petition No.1097-L of 2020) and extends his no objection that if the matter is referred to the Competent Authority, who shall examine the case of the petitioners alongwith their batch-mates as well seniors within the guidelines of dicta laid down by the apex Court and rules in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 03 months. Needless to mention that any findings of that Committee can be challenged by the petitioners or by any aggrieved person through independent proceedings and not under the contempt proceedings. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that in another inquiry competent officers opined that the case of Gul Hassan Jatoi (supra) is not applicable to them with regard to promotion, suffice to say that Police Rules are binding upon authorities, however, interpretation of the apex Court and guidelines provided in judgment, particularly paragraphs 56 and 71, shall be examined as afresh and earlier opinion shall not come in the way of promotion.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

5 . Const. P. 5517/2021 M/s W.R Edible Oil Refinery V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Federal Excise Duty (Section 46)

while exercising jurisdiction under ibid section 46(2) primary notice had already been sent to the petitioner vide letter dated 01.09.2021, however, the same is not impugned here, perhaps for the reason that cognizance against the petitioner, being involved in alleged fraud or evasion of duty, may have been taken and disclosed therein. Hence, unless there is a challenged to the initial/primary notice issued on 01.09.2021, it cannot be conceived that the instant impugned notice under section 46 of Federal Excise Act, 2005, which is dated 06.09.2021, is devoid of any such prerequisite of Section 46 of ibid Act of 2005. It is not even disclosed and/or pleaded in the petition that the petitioner has not received any such notice dated 01.09.2021..
Read more

Matter:FED. EXCISE

6 . Suit 2019/2015 A&Z Agro Industries (Pvt) Limited. V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others.. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153223 ]
Search of premises under section 38 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, and section 175 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

7 . Cr.J.A 631/2019 JAWAD ALI S/O DEEDAR ALI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153212 ]
Matter:IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS

8 . Const. P. 1955/2021 Bashir Ahmed Soomro V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153233 ]
we direct the respondents that they shall constitute a fresh Board comprising of recruitment committee/Board and they shall conduct test in the applied Chemistry as well as provide ample opportunity to the Petitioner for an interview and shall pass a speaking order with regard to his regularization in case if he qualifies shall be accommodated within two months. It is pertinent to mention here that recruitment committee shall also examine the cases of the persons/employees who were batchmats of the petitioner were regularized; petitioner shall also be treated one same anology.
Read more

Matter:AGAINST NOTIFICATION

9 . Const. P. 6218/2020 Dr. Faraz Ahmed Wajidi V/S Chancellor DOW University Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153211 ]
The caption petition has raised substantial questions of law involving interpretation of the certain provisions of The DOW University of Health Sciences Act, 2004 (`Act-2004`) and the Dow Employees (Service) Statute, 2007, and the principles governing the Writ of Quo Warranto as well as the power of the syndicate/competent authority of respondent-University to make a contractual appointment under the Act-2004 as amended up-to-date and Service Statute 2007--In our view, the evaluation made by an Expert Committee of respondent-university ought not to be easily interfered with by this Court which does not have the necessary expertise to undertake the exercise that is necessary for such purpose. It is a settled proposition that the competent authority, within its power to make its assessment, has to assess the candidature of a candidate for regular appointment or on contract basis, on case to case basis. On the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified with the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Ashraf Sangri v. Federation of Pakistan and others (2014 SCMR 157). In the instant case, prima-facie, the competent authority has assessed the candidature of the private respondents and appointed them in the respondent-university, which does not require interference at our end.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

10 . Const. P. 5455/2021 Inayatullah V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153224 ]
The petitioner has challenged the notification dated 02.09.2021, in respect of his posting and transfer order as Principal (BS-20) National AGRO Technical Training Centre Hyderabad on the ground, inter alia, that the impugned notification was issued to post him under the junior officer--We are of the view that Article 212 of the Constitution ousts the jurisdiction of this Court in respect of the matters about terms and conditions of Civil Servants.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

11 . Cr.Bail 393/2021 Ashique Malik V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

12 . Cr.Bail 284/2021 Wazir Ali Jatoi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

13 . Cr.Misc. 345/2021 Aneel V/S The State & others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

14 . Const. P. 5467/2021 Jamal Muhammad V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153207 ]
Admittedly the petitioner is/was a civil servant and the question of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him ought to have been assailed before the learned Sindh Service Tribunal under section 4 of the Sindh Service Tribunal Act, 1974, however, he remained silent for the considerable time and purportedly preferred mercy appeal for reinstatement in service in the year 2008 followed by another application in the year 2020. Besides that, the disciplinary matters fall within the expression ???terms and conditions of service???. Hence, the same cannot be called into question under Article 199 of the Constitution to set aside the dismissal from service order.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

15 . Const. P. 5430/2020 Imad Samad V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act (SRO 833(I)/2018 Section 19), Import Policy , Rules of Business, 1973 (Schedule-II), Custom Act (Section 19), Import Policy Order 2020, Rules of Business, 1973, Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153148 ]
- Import of vintage cars on the strength of SRO No.833(I)/2018 dated 03.07.2018 followed by a decision in the case of Moin Jamal Abbasi in CP No.D-4124 of 2019 reported as 2020 PTD 660. --Full Bench was constituted to consider the question arising out of litigation:- Whether the subject SRO No.833(I)/2018 issued in terms of Section 19 of Customs Act, 1969 can also be treated as SRO issued by the Ministry of Commerce in terms of Section 3 of the Import & Export Control Act, 1950, permitting import of vintage cars which are otherwise not importable as being old and used in terms of the Import Policy Order of both 2016 and 2020.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

16 . Const. P. 4496/2018 Muhammad Sadiq V/S Chairman EOBI and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153232 ]
With regard to length of service, counsel for the EOBI contends that the petitioner remained employee of the respondent for a period of four years, therefore, he is not entitled for any benefit. Needless to mention that decision/termination was challenged by the petitioner in referred grievance application which was allowed, hence, it cannot be said that length of service of the petitioner was only four years. That service would be treated as upto the age of superannuation.
Read more

Matter:PENSION

17 . Const. P. 4776/2021 M/s Al-Hamd Steel Furnace V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act (amendment of Import General Manifest IGM)

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153133 ]
The amendment, as sought by the petitioner, could not have been carried out in terms of Section 45(2) of Customs Act, 1969 as this section relates to an ???obvious error??? in the import manifest or an omission which in the opinion of such officer was result of an accident or inadvertence. Petitioner???s case has not fallen in any of such exceptions inviting and/or calling for an amendment or issuance of supplementary import manifest as it is apparently a deliberate attempt to provide an umbrella to the original consignee as against recovery of Rs.71.179 Million. --Previously there was absolutely no permission whatsoever for carrying out any amendment in the import manifest except as provided in subsection (2). This subsection (3) was replaced by a proviso introduced through Finance Act 2021 which now provides that before berthing of vessel or the crossover of the vessel, as the case may be, the person incharge of a conveyance or his duly authorized agent may amend the import manifest subject to rules notified by the Board. ---The replaced subsection (3) of Section 45 would be applicable in the sense that except as provided in subsection (2) no import manifest shall be amended. Event disclosed is prior to amendment carried out via Finance Bill 2021. This would leave a very little margin, in fact no margin, for the amendment sought to be carried out in the import manifest in terms of subsection (2) as it is specifically for an obvious error or in fact an omission, which in the opinion of the concerned officer is a result of accident or inadvertence. In fact petitioner???s case has not fallen in either of the two i.e. its case is neither covered by subsection (2) of Section 45 nor the proviso recently inserted by Finance Act, 2021.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

18 . Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 455/2017 Commissioner Inland Revenue V/S M/s. New Allied Electronics Industries (Pvt) Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act (section 195), Custom Act (section 79), Custom Act (section 193), Sale Tax Act 1990 (section 47)

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153135 ]
Under Customs Act, 1969, Section 79 onwards is a procedure which regulates the import through filing of Goods Declaration along with necessary documents including examination of imported goods and clearance thereof. Such mechanism was adopted and exhausted by the customs when goods declaration was dealt with. The purported allegation of misdeclaration was in fact within the domain and jurisdiction of Collectorate of Customs, which, in case of any controversy, could have retained the consignment/goods for further inquiry or chemical test and determine the duty provisionally till disposal of the inquiry or reassessment. This has not happened in the instant case as had it been a misdeclaration of the goods, the officers concerned may have taken cognizance and could have objected to the assessment in terms of Section 193 and 195 of Customs Act, 1969 read with Section 32 of the said Act. Sales Tax Act, 1990 does not deal with issue of misdeclaration as being dealt with by the customs officials under Customs Act, 1969. Therefore, unless a misdeclaration is established by the customs officials such recourse of recovery of short levy of sales tax could not have been triggered. The dispute of classification was never raised at customs level.
Read more

Matter:SALES TAX

19 . Const. P. 4917/2021 Penta International V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153090 ]
Tabulation of redemption fine.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

20 . Cr.Bail 125/2021 MALIK MOEEN AWAN S/O MUNEER AHMED V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day, such delay having not been explained plausibly, as per FIR no Bhatta was paid. The 161 Cr.P.C statements of the witnesses have been recorded with further delay of 15 days even to FIR. Co-accused have already been granted bail by learned trial Court. Case of further inquiry is made out.
Read more

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

21 . Const. P. 4978/2021 Dr. Muhammad Qasim V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153231 ]
It is pertinent to mention that petitioner is working in BPS-19 and his promotion will be due after one year hence at this juncture questioning direct appointment on BPS-20 cannot be termed justified and legal; hence instant petition is dismissed.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

22 . Const. P. 5281/2021 Ayaz Ahmed and Othes V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153234 ]
relieving letters of employer (SSGC Limited/respondents No.2 and 3) is against the spirit of the judgment and that paragraph 61 of the judgment cannot be treated as against the petitioners, hence SSGC has taken wrong decision in interpretation of that judgment--It is settled principle of law that promulgation of Ordinances are passed only when the assembly is not in session. The Ordinances are meant to deal with a situation of emergency required to be endorsed by the Assembly--Without prejudice to the above, it may safely be added that interpretation may be done of the judgment of Honourable Apex Court but such course would not be available when the consequence of judgment of Honourable Apex Court is being challenged while referring to interpretation thereof by this Court. If such view is allowed to hold the field, the same shall open the rooms for making a challenge to consequences of judgment(s) of Honourable Apex Court which, we would insist, may prejudice the binding effect thereof, as insisted by Article 189 of the Constitution. In the instant matter, the authority claims to have passed the order in compliance of the judgment of Honourable Apex Court. The legal position, being so, leave us with no other option but to add that appropriate remedy to challenge the consequence of judgment of Honourable Apex Court is only by approaching the Apex Court. The instant petition, being incompetent, is dismissed in limine.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

23 . Const. P. 4978/2020 Anwar Ali V/S NAB and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153092 ]
NAB matter - Petition for post-arrest bail
Read more

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

24 . Cr.Acctt.A 12/2020 ANWAR AI S/O RAJAB ALI V/S THE STATE THROUGH CHAIRMAIN NAB Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153091 ]
NAB matter - Appeal against conviction
Read more

Matter:IMPRISONMENT UPTO 7 YEARS

25 . Const. P. 535/2016 M. Qasim Jakhar V/S Province of SIndh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153124 ]
Enforcement of decision of SST---Besides above, the point of laches is also involved in this matter on the ground that the petitioner has approached this court in the year 2016, whereas the alleged cause of action accrued to him in the year 2007 when he was purportedly terminated from his service, the reasoning assigned by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has approached this court based on decision passed by the learned SST in the year 2010; that a constitutional petition involving violation and infringement of fundamental rights of the citizens could not be thrown out on the ground of delay in filing the same. We do not concur with this assertion of the learned counsel for the Petitioner with his explanation of laches as rights of the petitioner were not dependent upon other petitioners in the referred petition. We are of the considered view that the instant Petition falls within the doctrine of laches as the Petitioner filed the instant Petition in January 2016, whereas the alleged cause of action accrued to him in the year 2007, i.e. approximately 08 years before the filing of the instant Petition. It is well-settled law that those who slept over their rights cannot be given a premium of their own fault because such conduct does trigger the principle of waiver. The observations of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Ardeshir Cowasjee v. Karachi Building Control Authority (1999 SCMR 2883) is a guiding principle on the issue of laches.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

26 . Const. P. 4668/2015 Lucky Cement Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153093 ]
Petitioner employers sought declaration that demand of contributions by the Federal EOBI under EOBI Act 1976 is illegal as EOBI became federal subject after 18th Amendment and subsequent Sindh EOBI Act 2014; Sindh Province did enact the Act 2014 but could not establish the Institution; CCI resolved EOBI shall remain with Federal Government. Held petitioners can???t take benefit of dispute between the Federation and Province; priority must be given to the employees as the Old Age Benefit law is a beneficial law, aimed for the benefit of the employees therefore in case contribution amount is not received by the EOBI ultimately it is the employees who will suffer. Hence these petitions are disposed of in terms that petitioners shall deposit the contributions and other dues according to EOBI Act 1976; all amount deposited with the Nazir shall be returned in favour of the EOBI established under the EOBI Act 1976.
Read more

Matter:NATURE OF CASE NOT ENTERED

27 . I.T.R.A 49/2021 CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY V/S THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INLAND REVENUE AND ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (Section 236A)

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153127 ]
Section 236A of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 requires a person, making sale by public auction or auction by a tender of any property or goods (including property or goods confiscated or attached, either belonging to or not belonging to the Government, local Government, any authority, a company, a foreign association declared to be a company under sub-clause (vi) of clause (b) of subsection (2) of section 80, or a foreign contractor or a consultant or a consortium or Collector of Customs or Commissioner Inland Revenue or any other authority, shall collect advance tax, computed on the basis of sale price of such property and at the rate specified in First Schedule, from the person to whom such property or goods are being sold. This provision is as clear as crystal however it is followed by an explanation inserted by Finance Act 2020 for the removal of doubt that the expression of sale of public auction or auction by tender include renewal of license previously sold by public auction or auction by a tender and where payment is received in installments, advance tax is to be collected with each installment. As we observe that there is no necessity of any explanation or any clarification as section 236A is clear in its entirety. Notwithstanding the above, even the explanation of clarificatory nature operates retrospectively as it only provides an assistance in interpreting the provisions correctly in terms of intention of the legislature, subject to however if a contradictory situation is reached by the Court interpreting the basic provisions as against explanation. We are, therefore, of the view that the applicant described as an agent collecting advance tax from the bidders/occupants/lessees/ licensees etc. to whom the premises/property was given either by way of public auction or tender or by any other mode and includes renewal of such document.
Read more

Matter:INCOME TAX

28 . Cr.Bail 50/2021 Muhammad Zaman Oghai V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

29 . Suit 516/2015 Jubilee Life Insurance Co V/S The United Insurance Co Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: TRADE MARK, Takaful Rules, 2012 (Rule 2)

2016 CLD 1938 [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153191 ]
Section 39 of the Trademark Ordinance, 2001 relates to the rights conferred by registration whereas Section 40 of the Ordinance deals with the infringement of the registered trademark. In terms of Section 40 subsection 3(c) of the Ordinance a person shall infringe a registered trademark if the person uses in the course of a trade a mark which is identical with, or deceptively similar to, the trademark in relation to services of the same description as that of service in respect of which a trademark is registered. The proposition thus appears to be simple that service which is being dealt with by both the plaintiff and the defendant whether is of same description or otherwise to attract the provisions as referred above. I may refer to the international classification of goods and services and it seems that it is being dealt with by class-36 and there is no dispute in this regard as the defendant himself chooses to apply under the same class. The defence that they have been dealing with takaful business would not turn much as it is being dealt with by the same classification
Read more

30 . Cr.Bail 460/2021 Sikandar Raza Jafferi & another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

31 . Const. P. 1718/2021 Muhammad Aslam and Others V/S The Sect: Education & Literacy Dept & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
we dispose of this petition with direction to the Secretary Education (Schools) that Grievance Redressal Committee shall examine the case of the petitioners after providing opportunity of hearing and in case they are qualified, having merits, they shall be accommodated/appointed in view of earlier advertisement made in 2018 and the policy
Read more

Matter:APPOINTMENT

32 . Const. P. 4247/2020 Umar Siddique V/S M/s AGE & Sons Pvt Ltd Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER

33 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 132/2015 The Collector of Customs V/S M/s. General Food Corporation, Karachi. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act (Section 80), Custom Act (Section 32), Sale Tax Act 1990 ( section 38), Sale Tax Act 1990 ( Sixth Schedule of Sales Tax Act, 1990), Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (Section 230)

Once the assessment order is passed and clearance of the goods under Section 80 is made, the consignment then is out of charge and then such assessment is not liable to be intervened unless the recourse as available under law is invoked before a Collector Appeals for reopening of the assessment etc. In addition to this the amended section 38 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and insertion of Section 230 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the customs officials including respondent No.1 cannot be deemed to have been appointed as officer of Inland Revenue. Thus the contravention so prepared is without jurisdiction and the authority. The Collectorate of Customs does not enjoy the authority of collecting sales tax and income tax of the regime under discussion, once the goods are out of charge. They do the act as an agent at import stage in the capacity of collecting agent and can recover the avoided or short paid customs duty and other taxes levied but not once the goods are out of charge.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

34 . Const. P. 4243/2020 Muhammad Mustafa V/S M/s AGE & Sons (Pvt) Ltd Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER

35 . Const. P. 1083/2020 Syed Jawad Arshad V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152957 ]
Quashing / bail, in fiscal offences, in writ jurisdiction
Read more

Matter:SALES TAX

36 . Const. P. 2926/2021 Sajjasd Haider Jhin Jhin V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
transfer and promotion
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

37 . Const. P. 3467/2017 Dr. Shaista Shoukat V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152963 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

38 . Const. P. 2636/2015 M/S Thatta Cement Company V/S Ghulam Muhammad and Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-HYD - 153241 ]

39 . Const. P. 7077/2015 Amanullah and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:IMPLEMENTATION

40 . Const. P. 8671/2017 Abdul Mabood V/S Chairman NAB and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
NAB Matter - Pre-arrest bail - Section 91 Cr.P.C.
Read more

Matter:BAIL BEFORE ARREST

41 . J.M 8/2021 M/S. GETZ PHARMA (PVT.) LIMITED V/S NOVARTIS AG & ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152918 ]
Patent Ordinance 2000: Section 27 does not restrain Controller from exercising power under Sub Section (1), if an other proceeding is pending but no stay is operating. Interpretation of statute: expressio unis est exclusio alterius and casus omissus explained.
Read more

Matter:PATENT DESIGN

42 . M.A. 7/2017 Southern Networks Limited V/S PEMRA Thr. Its Chairman & Another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Rules, 2009, PEMRA Ordinance, 2002

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152919 ]
-Definition of a ???person??? is provided under Ordinance, 2002, which includes an individual, partnership, association, company, trust or corporation. Invariably in the show-cause/decision impugned, PEMRA presumed to have issued licenses to individual directors hence referred that licenses to them should not have been transferred by them. It is misconceived impression. --The issuance of licence is subject to Section 19 of Ordinance 2002. The authority enjoys exclusive right to issue licence for the establishment and operation of broadcasting media and distribution services and that these licences shall be in conformity with the principles of fairness and equity and the eligibility of such applicant to whom the licence is likely to be granted is based on prescribed criteria notified in advance. ---With this understanding of law perhaps the intensity of violation and penalty imposed on appellant should be viewed in term of their proportionality. Wednesbury???s principle while defining proportionality has discussed role of public officers entrusted with the discretionary powers. However, it is often seen that officers??? entrusted with such powers exercising their discretion goes unattended. Discretion at times goes unmeasured. Subjective analysis of a discretion exercised by public officers is a difficult proposition but proportionality is a tool which can play its role to serve the subject. The principle requires that measures adopted by the authority should not exceed the limits of what is proper and necessary in order to attain the objectives, legitimately. It is generally expected that where there is choice between several appropriate remedies and measures, the recourse that must be the least onerous and least cumbersome be adopted.
Read more

Matter:AGAINST DECISION OF PEMRA

43 . Const. P. 558/2018 Muhammad Younus V/S Province of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152925 ]
Perusal of above reflects that the word ???consider??? within adjudication made by this Court amounts approval to be promoted, hence, concerned Authority has already recommended the case for approval, therefore, the petitioner???s case shall be approved as per recommendations within 15 days with compliance report.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

44 . Const. P. 5674/2020 M/s Spectrum Enterprises V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 153009 ]
Sub-section 2 of Section 81 caters for a situation when the goods are allowed to be cleared or delivered on the basis of provisional determination, the amount of duty, taxes and charges correctly payable to those goods shall be determined within six months from the date of provisional determination. The time is further extendable provided the officer concerned may in the circumstances of exceptional nature and after recording such situation extends period of final determination, which shall in no case exceeds ninety days.2 Proviso to sub-section 2 provides the calculating mechanism of the period prescribed in subsection 2 of Section 81. Sub-section 3 of Section 81 provides the mechanism on completion of final determination. The amount already paid or guaranteed shall be adjusted against the amount payable on the basis of final determination and difference between the two amounts shall be paid forthwith to or by the importer as the case may be. --Indeed the ???Explanation??? in a statute/enactment does form an integral part to the extent of explaining and elaborating meaning of the word in the section3 and the purpose is to explain, clarify, add or subtract something by clarification 4, however, the word provisional assessment is neither used in sub-section 1 nor in sub-section 2. It is sub-section 1 which secured differential amount on provisional determination and not provisional assessment 5. If the interpretation of respondent is accepted then customs would never bother to determine it finally and would enjoy benefit of not doing anything after provisional release. We may observe that the respondent conceded that the cause of delay in final determination is not attributable to the importer.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

45 . Const. P. 4434/2020 Syed Manzoor Shah V/S The Chief Sect: and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
The Sindh Teaching Hospitals (Establishment of Management Board) Act, 2020
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

46 . Const. P. 4356/2019 Arshad Ahmed V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152924 ]
Without prejudice to above, since there is consent order, no review was preferred even that order was not assailed. In case, if there was no deduction by the department and they were sending salary directly to the account; that is not justification to withhold group insurance. Accordingly, Secretary Health, Government of Sindh shall ensure that group insurance amount is paid as per her entitlement to the nominee without any delay. While parting this order, learned AG Sindh shall ensure presence of any focal person of Accountant General Sindh (A.G. Sindh) to assist this Court that under what capacity complete salary was transferred and they failed to deduct the amount and who were responsible with regard to such irregularity, if any. This exercise shall be completed within 15 days.
Read more

Matter:PENSION

47 . Const. P. 5168/2021 Urooba Ayman and Others V/S PMC and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:EXAMINATION

48 . Const. P. 5168/2021 Urooba Ayman and Others V/S PMC and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Medical and Dental College Admissions Test (MDCAT)
Read more

Matter:EXAMINATION

49 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 826/2015 Collector of Customs V/S M/s. Samad Enterprises Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152888 ]
the show-cause notice is without jurisdiction on the count that the customs authorities have not been conferred with the powers of adjudication as far as Sales Tax Act, 1990 and the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 are concerned. Customs Authorities have powers to collect sales tax/income tax etc. at the import stage in the capacity of collecting agents on the basis of registration certificate and the status is being adjudged by the registration authority itself. In the absence of any evidence which could contravene the requirements of the subject SRO, no other view is deducible as these are questions of facts alone, which are thus answered accordingly in favour of respondent and against the applicant.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

50 . Const. P. 2463/2020 Khalid Abdul Maroof & Ors V/S Govt of Sindh & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
DPC
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

51 . Const. P. 4522/2021 Kh: Ghulam Ghous V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152893 ]
officers are posted on acting charge---Secretary Local Government says that he will examine the record as to whether Miss Shamona Sadaf is working in BPS-18 or BPS-16 till then he will relieve that lady and will not be posted on that post until the issue is resolved. In case, inquiry speaks that she is having BPS-18 or she is posted on same place on any other post and if she was working in BPS-16 and has been designated BPS-18, delinquent officers including that lady shall face the consequences to be carried out by the authorities.
Read more

Matter:APPOINTMENT

52 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 450/2016 Collector of Customs V/S M/s. Allied Engineering & Services Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152920 ]
As far as finalization of the provisional assessment in time is concerned, the provisional assessments were made on 07.09.2012 and it was required to be finalized within the time frame given under section 81(2) of the Customs Act i.e. six months. This finalization ought to have been completed by 06.03.2013 (incorrectly stated 07.03.2013) as the law requires finalization within six months. The final assessment was made on 15.05.2013. Reliance of the learned counsel for the applicant was placed on the note of Additional Director of Customs which forwarded a summary for the approval of the extension. Allegedly the time was extended on 20.03.2013 by 60 days. By the time the purported summary was granted, on 20.03.2013, six months??? time had already lapsed. The fact of the matter is that the time for finalization had already lapsed. Even if 60 days??? time is counted from the date when time lapsed i.e. 06.03.2013, it should not have gone beyond 06.05.2013 whereas final assessment was made on 15.05.2013.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

53 . Cr.Acctt.A 52/2018 ALI AKBAR PARIHAR S/O MUHAMMAD BUX PARIHAR V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 - Corruption and corrupt practices
Read more

Matter:IMPRISONMENT ABOVE 7 YEARS

54 . Cr.Acctt.A 51/2018 ASADULLAH SOLANGI S/O ABDUL HAMEED SOLANGI V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 - corruption and corrupt practices.
Read more

Matter:IMPRISONMENT ABOVE 7 YEARS

55 . Suit 1601/2008 Mst. Shahnaz V/S Muhammad Saleem & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:PERMANENT INJUNCTION

56 . Suit 1499/2008 Muhammad Asif Saranur & Others V/S Yousuf Shaikh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:MANDATORY INJUNCTION

57 . Const. P. 1289/2017 Mst. Zeba Unisa V/S Province of Sindh and ORs Sindh High Court, Karachi
where family heads are missing and families are suffering due to financial crises in maintaining minimum standard of life; they would also examine as to whether financial aid / assistance can be made through Zakat / Social Welfare Department and Bait-ul-Maal. They shall also assist this Court with regard to services of the missing persons whose salaries are stopped by their departments because of their absence (missing) that whether their families are entitled to receive the same or otherwise?, as per applicable service laws
Read more

Matter:MISSING PERSONS

58 . Const. P. 5063/2021 M/s Gul Ahmed Energy Ltd V/S Court of Commission for Worksmen Comp. & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152830 ]
we decide this petition with direction to the Commission /Authority to frame legal issue with regard to jurisdiction, as stated above, particularly in paragraph-8 of the impugned order, and allow the parties to submit documents, including additional documents if not already filed, or lead evidence and thereafter finally decide the jurisdictional question
Read more

Matter:DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION

59 . I.T.R.A 32/2020 THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE V/S MAHVASH & JAHANGIR SIDDIQUE FOUNDATION Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152708 ]
Section 177(6A) of the Income Tax Ordinance
Read more

Matter:INCOME TAX

60 . Const. P. 580/2020 Syed Mansoob Ahmed Khatri and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152738 ]
principally the petitioners are seeking inclusion of `Orderly Allowance` in their pensionable emoluments in the light of Amendment No.19 in clause/regulation 46 of Chapter IV (Emoluments) of Civil Aviation Service Regulation-2014 (CSR-2014) and the decision of 179th meeting held on 1.8.2019 by Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority (PCAA) Board Secretariat---Accordingly, while following the principle of law enunciated in I.A. Sherwani's case (ibid), and in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case while invoking the jurisdiction conferred upon this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution, we hereby declare the impugned decision /action/order of the Respondent-CAA is in negation to the strict and prohibitory command contained in Article 25 of the Constitution, because the Petitioners have been treated with sheer discrimination, which cannot be approved on any premises whatsoever.
Read more

Matter:PENSION

61 . Const. P. 3386/2021 Mehreen Fatima and Others V/S Learned / Full Bench NIRC and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152696 ]
It is pertinent to mention that services of the petitioners fall within the ambit of master and servant hence servant cannot compel the master with regard to his posting on the plea of wedlock policy as in field but that alone shall not be a reason and terms and conditions are to be followed. Without prejudice to the issue pending before the NIRC which presently is not available, at present we are not inclined to grant relief and stay transfer of the petitioners hence petition is dismissed. However petitioners will be at liberty to agitate their issue before NIRC as and when bench is available and this order shall not be used against them.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

62 . Const. P. 1911/2017 Makhdoom Syed Faiz Mustafa Bukhari V/S The NAB Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
National Accountability Bureau, 1999 - Petition for pre-arrest bail - Section 91, Cr.P.C.
Read more

Matter:BAIL BEFORE ARREST

63 . Suit 292/2017 Tatal Parco Pakistan Limited. V/S Sindh & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:DECLARATION

64 . Const. P. 4870/2021 Tanveer Ahmed & Others V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Further it is contended that CPEC program is in existence and continued. Safety of employees, foreign and/or local(s), is priority as CPEC is a sensitive project. Hence service of petitioners were taken on contract hence till further hearing they shall be considered as contract employees with same perks and privileges however competent authority shall examine each case in terms whether or not petitioners are eligible to continue their services on contract.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

65 . Cr.Bail 40/2021 Abdul Khalique @ Gulzar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

66 . Suit 166/2006 SHAHID QAZI V/S RPOVINCE OF SINDH & ORS Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT

67 . Suit 48/2017 Tauseef Ahmed. V/S Pearl Continetal Hotel & another. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:DAMAGES

68 . Const. P. 2960/2019 Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission and Ors V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
petitioner No.2 has exhausted the remedy before the Appellate Forum and perhaps, as stated above, appeal already stands dismissed, this is a futile exercise to challenge the order-in-original directly before this Court when already appeal of the petitioner No.2 has also been decided/dismissed.
Read more

Matter:SALES TAX

69 . Const. P. 1735/2013 Amjad Ali Khan V/S Govt. of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
The above provision, prima facie, vests jurisdiction and competence in ???Government??? to constitute a ???committee??? for purpose, as may be prescribed. This provision, prima facie, is aimed to deal with any situation which can???t be confined to ???safety??? but shall always be deemed to include all steps, as necessary to ensure complete protection to rights and interests of the ???workers???. Accordingly, Federation and Province shall submit complete measures taken by them with regard to establishing any institute or mining committee of the independent persons to safeguard the interest of workers of mines.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

70 . Const. P. 1961/2020 Alucan (Pvt) Ltd & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152792 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

71 . Const. P. 2052/2020 M/s Majeed & Sons Steel Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152807 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

72 . Const. P. 2101/2020 Pakistan Beverage Ltd & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152802 ]
Matter:FUEL CHARGES

73 . Const. P. 2002/2020 M/s Noor Leather Garments Pvt Ltd & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152796 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

74 . Const. P. 4989/2021 Syed Imdad Ali Shah V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152646 ]
Prima facie, it has been surfaced that the same issue of appointments was adjudicated by the apex Court in HRC No. 16082-S of 2015. Relevant paragraph-15 is that:- ???15. The illegal appointments made by the Selection Board in SRP Hyderabad or in any other District of Sindh shall be enquired into by the following officers: (1) A.D. Khawja Additional I.G. Police. (2) A.I.G. Sanaullah Abbasi. (3) A.I.G. Naeem Ahmed Shaikh. The above, prima facie, shows that the initiation of the enquiry can???t be challenged to be as unreasonable , particularly in view of the fact that it was, so directed, by honourable Apex Court. Petition is also annexed with inquiry report by the competent officers, nominated by the apex court which shows departmental proceedings against the petitioner. Further, page 177 shows charge sheet whereby petitioner has been charged with regard to illegal/irregular appointments while he was posted at Hyderabad in the year 2018. It is also matter of record that petitioner, being SSP, is enjoying his position as SSP Sujawal and inquiry is pending since 2018, yet same has not been completed which is shocking, particularly when it relates to irregular appointment under directives of Honourable Apex Court. The competent officer(s), surprisingly, yet failed to conduct inquiry within stipulated period---Without prejudice to this denovo inquiry has been notified, hence, petitioner cannot chose a particular officer and manner of inquiry other than provided under the law.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

75 . Const. P. 1762/2020 M/s HSJ Steel & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152810 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

76 . Const. P. 2330/2020 M/s Mehboob Re-Rollings Mills and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152801 ]
Matter:FUEL CHARGES

77 . Const. P. 597/2020 M/s Garibsons Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152797 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

78 . Const. P. 476/2020 Dewan Cement Ltd and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152784 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

79 . Const. P. 2044/2020 M/s Pakistan Gum Ind. Pvt Ltd & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152794 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

80 . Const. P. 603/2020 Aisha Steel Mills Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152789 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

81 . Const. P. 1771/2020 M/s Universal Leather Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152805 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

82 . Const. P. 2515/2020 Collapsible Tube Co. Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152800 ]
Matter:FUEL CHARGES

83 . Const. P. 2108/2020 M/s Tauheed International Pvt Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152799 ]
Matter:FUEL CHARGES

84 . Const. P. 431/2020 Amreli Steel Pvt Ltd and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152787 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

85 . Const. P. 1217/2020 D.G Khan Cement Co. Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152803 ]
Matter:DIRECTION

86 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 239/2014 Collector of Customs V/S M/s. Lake View Forest (Pvt) Ltd. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152620 ]
-The scheme of the Customs Act reveals that the subject is governed in terms of Section 25 of the Customs Act and in case it could not be determined under Section 25, then the recourse is available by applying valuation ruling if available in terms of Section 25-A whereafter it is finalized under the Customs Act, 1969. After the assessment and the release of the consignment, the goods are made out of any charge of the Customs. In case the aforesaid process is required to be revisited, (in appropriate cases), the mechanism is available under the law such as Section 32, 193 and 195 of the Customs Act, 1969. --The event of post scrutiny of the goods declaration after assessment and release of goods, is not covered by Section 80(3), as undertaken. It is applicable at the time of original checking of the goods declaration in his hands and goods are yet to be assessed and released and not at belated stage when even the goods have been released. This situation (for appropriate cases) is catered by Section 32, 193 and 195 of the Customs Act, 1969 where under a show cause and/or an appeal within 30 days could have been preferred, or the Board or the Collector of Customs or the Collector of Custom (Adjudication) may, within his jurisdiction, call for the examination of the records of any proceedings under the act for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any decision or order passed by a subordinate officer respectively, could have been followed, however, none of them were invoked. Surprisingly the applicant opt to invoke Section 80(3) of the Customs Act which is ???then??? shown to have been followed by consequences. It is thus under above referred provisions when the competent authority is of the view that the assessment was not made in accordance with law, the past and closed transaction could be reopened but not in the manner as done in the instant case. Prima-facie it is neither a case of mis-declaration as correct PCT was claimed by the consignee nor this is a case of mis-declaration in terms of its value declared, to make out a case under Section 32 of the Act. --- Without prejudice applicant???s case is that Section 80(3) of Act was rightly invoked under the given facts and circumstances. In the instant case, if at all, there was any illegality in the assessment of the goods, it could be attributed to the sub-ordinate officers of the Customs and hence the implication of Section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969 would not be attracted to penalize the respondent or their directors. The purported action by Customs was triggered under Section 80(3) of the Customs Act, 1969 does not have a legal cover in view of the goods being out of charge and the recourses which could have been made were under Section 32, 193 and 195 of the Customs Act, 1969 which were not directly invoked.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

87 . Const. P. 607/2020 M/s Ghani Chemical Ind Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152808 ]
Matter:DISCONNECTION OF ELECTRICITY

88 . Const. P. 3683/2016 Prof: Dr. Rana Hadi and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
We expect that university shall treat the professors with the due respect as well as the professors are expected that they will perform their duties with diligence within their code of conduct. Accordingly, petition No. D-3683 of 2016 stands disposed of in view of undertaking, made by learned counsel for respondents.
Read more

Matter:NATURE OF CASE NOT ENTERED

89 . Const. P. 494/2017 Ms. Reshma Khan and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
With regard to promotions, if any, petitioners shall be heard by the respondents and in case any application/presentation is preferred that shall be decided within one month.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

90 . Suit 289/2005 ABDUL RAHIM ORS. V/S BUKHAT JAMAL Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

91 . E.P 10/2018 Ghulam Murtaza Jatoi V/S Zulfiqar Ali Behan & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-HYD - 152895 ]

92 . Const. P. 3578/2021 Jamil Farooqui V/S KMC and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
In the given circumstances, respondents are ordered to provide whatever material is available with them against the petitioner to the Petitioner, who to be confronted in accordance with law and let the proceedings take place as such against the petitioner after having given due opportunity of hearing and let a speaking order be passed no later than three (03) weeks from the date hereof, failing which appropriate orders will be passed by this Court.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

93 . Const. P. 4050/2021 M/s IFL (Pvt) Ltd V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Let detail statement tabulating the sums be submitted by the petitioners with the Nazir of this Court, within six weeks, showing amount duly payable to EOBI Sindh. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned notice dated 10.07.2021 is hereby suspended till the next date of hearing, being payable to EOBI with the Nazir of this Court within stipulated time.
Read more

Matter:AGAINST NOTICE

94 . Const. P. 3943/2021 Saddam Hussain and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Counsel???s attention was drawn towards the aforementioned petition where admittedly a notification was issued against those petitioners who consequently filed C.P No.D-6378/2020, whereas, in the case at hand, no such notification or threats have been issued to the petitioners. To answer this, learned counsel draws our attention to the Judgment dated 18.02.2021 passed by Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Appeal Nos. 936 & 937 of 2020, wherein the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held that ???any person who is not in service cannot seek regularization of service???, hence the like request as the learned counsel fears that as soon as notices are received by the respondent No.2, to make the petitioners remediless, it will remove the petitioners from the service. Contentions raised by learned counsel merit consideration, particularly when similar order has been passed in C.P No.D-6378/2020, which order to apply mutatis mutandis in the present petition. Issue notice to the respondents as well as DAG. Office is directed to tag the instant petition along with the said petition and both of these petitions are directed to come up together on the next date.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

95 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 275/2010 Collector of Customs V/S M/s A.U Technologies & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152619 ]
the questions, as proposed by the applicant department, do not appear to be the questions of law. It could have been the questions in appeal but not in Special Customs Reference Application where only questions of law arising out of the Tribunal Order could be taken into consideration. The facts of the case are that the consignments were imported on 15.09.2007 and the Goods Declaration was filed on 18.09.2007 whereas the Valuation Ruling No.22/2008, is of 11.03.2008, and hence became a convincing tool for the officers. However, there is no concrete evidence as to the value of the goods arrived at Port on 15.09.2007 for which Goods Declaration was filed on 18.09.2007. The ibid valuation ruling was later in time that it came after about six months of the arrival of the goods. So the question before the Tribunal was whether there was sufficient evidence before Valuation Department for adjudging the value of the goods in terms of the subject Valuation Ruling which was later in time (above six months).
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

96 . Suit 583/2021 SICPA SA V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152569 ]
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

97 . Insolvency 1/2019 SYED RAHAT ALI V/S MST. KASHAF TANWEER & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Insolvency

the decree as the one here under consideration is not a debt within the meaning of the Act, and as such keeping in view the dictum laid by this Court referred to supra and in view of the Learned Official Assignee's Reference, it cannot form the basis of adjudication of the petitioner/husband as an insolvent. The instant petition, thus, being devoid of any merit is not maintainable, which is dismissed accordingly.
Read more

Matter:SETTLEMENT OF ACCOUNTS

98 . Const. P. 3291/2021 Azeem ur Rehim Khan Meo and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan


Matter:SERVICE

99 . Const. P. 6261/2020 SSGC Ltd V/S Registrar of Trade Union NIRC and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152532 ]
M/s. Sui Southern Gas Company Limited ("SSGC"), has sought enforcement of the guidelines provided by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in its order dated 11.03.2020 passed in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.4450/2019 (M/s Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. Karachi v. The Registrar Trade Unions, C/o National Industrial Relations Commission, Islamabad, and others), to the Registrar, National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC), for conducting the referendum with respect of determination of Collective Bargaining Agent (CBA) for the workmen employed in Petitioner-SSGC as provided under the Industrial Relations Act, 2012--we direct the Deputy Registrar NIRC to announce the result of the referendum for determination of Collective Bargaining Agent (CBA) for the workmen employed in Petitioner-SSGC. However, it is made clear that, if any of the parties in the proceedings is aggrieved by the outcome of the result of the referendum, they are at liberty to avail and exhaust their respective remedies in accordance with law.
Read more

Matter:DIRECTION

100 . Suit 1758/2019 Hilal Foods (Private) Limited V/S Danpak Food Industries (Private) Limited Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC, TRADE MARK, COPY RIGHT


Matter:TRADE MARKS ACT

101 . Cr.Bail 358/2021 Jehangir Bozdar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

102 . Const. P. 4417/2021 Dr. Mazhar Ali Jatoi V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152530 ]
that the petitioner has been placed on as an Officer on Special Duty (OSD)
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

103 . Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 183/2017 M/s. Silver Surgical Complex (Pvt) Ltd. V/S Commissioner I-R Zone-IV Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sale Tax Rules, 2006 (Rule 25), Sale Tax Act 1990 (Section 10), Sale Tax Act 1990 (Section 8(2))

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152547 ]
Supplies involving exempt and taxable purchase cannot be treated in a generalized way. Applicant while having input tax adjustment of the above period forgot to apply rule 25(3) of the ibid rules 2006 which does not permit the adjustment of input tax in its entirety when they deal with both taxable and exempt supplies. --Learned counsel for the applicant has argued to the extent of claiming refund in terms of section 10 of the Sales Tax Act. The scheme of Section 10 caters for an event other than applicant???s case. In terms of the facts and circumstances of the case where input adjustment is claimed on both exempt and taxable supplies as is the case of applicant before lower forums, we have to apply an unambiguous provision that deals the event and i.e. 8(2) of the ibid Act which directly deals with the input tax in respect of the supplies involving both exempt and taxable supplies.
Read more

Matter:SALES TAX

104 . Const. P. 2680/2020 Pakistan Broadcaster Association V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152516 ]
Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P.No.D-2680 of 2020 whereby the Court declare that the powers of the PEMRA vested in Section 30 of the PEMRA Ordinance 2002 could not be delegated to the Chairman or any other official of PEMRA by dint of Section 13 of PEMRA Ordinance, 2002 for suspension of Broadcast Media Licenses without framing of Rules. The decision of the Authority conveyed vide minutes of meeting dated 24.04.2020 is also declared null and void. All actions taken by the Chairman pursuant to the delegated powers for suspension of Broadcast Media Licenses are strike down.
Read more

Matter:AGAINST AMENDMENT

105 . Cr.Misc. 342/2021 Rafique Ahmed Panhyar V/S The State through DPG Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

106 . Cr.Bail 482/2021 Shafi Muhammad Kalhoro & others V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

107 . Spl:Sales Tax Ref: A. 313/2018 Commissioner I-R Zone-Vi V/S M/s. Fab Tax Industries Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sales Tax

The impugned order dated 07.03.2018 passed by Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue (Pakistan) Karachi; as well as of Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-III), Karachi dated 19.01.2015. The question, reframed and, placed before us in Court today prima facie does not arise out of the findings of the impugned order. Even Section 21(3) of Sales Tax Act, 1990, relied upon in the re framed question yet extraneous to the findings impugned, when perused appears to militate against the case articulated by applicant???s counsel. It seems that unnecessarily the jurisdiction of this Court is invoked by filing of the instant reference and perhaps on questions of fact, as proposed, nothing could turn.
Read more

Matter:TAX MATTER

108 . Const. P. 195/2016 Syed Riaz Ali Shah V/S M/s SSGC and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152518 ]
petition against show cause notice is not maintainable
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

109 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 223/2019 M/s. Pakistan Telephone Cables Ltd V/S The Customs Appellate Tribunal & others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Custom Act

These reference applications have been filed belatedly on 11.05.2019, along with applications for condonation of delay, on the premise that the applicants??? counsel did not communicate the impugned order to the applicants within time on account of a disconnect between with the parties their counsel. This could hardly be grounds for condonation of delay as the applicants are supposed to be vigilant in respect of their case and cannot claim any indulgence on account of their own indolence . In addition thereto, it appears that the copy of the impugned order was delivered on 21.01.2019, and not in May 2019 as claimed by the applicants. It was further alleged that the impugned order is void and no limitation would arise in such regard. Merely alleging that an order is void does not preclude a person from the ambit of limitation and it is settled law that shelter cannot be taken behind such assertions to vitiate the statutory requirements in respect of limitation.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

110 . Const. P. 4739/2021 Zakir Hussain Khaskheli V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Besides, matter pertains to conflict of interest and counsel legally cannot sue his client with the information provided by the department or any illegality (not crime) is seen by the counsel during the period he was in employment having access to record, as is assured by Article-9 of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. Needless to add that such obligation continues even after an end to such employment, therefore, this matter pertains to conflict of interest.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

111 . Const. P. 3461/2019 Shehzadi Erum V/S M.S Leprosy Hospital and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152455 ]
review application
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

112 . Suit 850/2020 Dewan Sugar Mills Limited V/S Federation of Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152456 ]
Selection for audit under section 25 of the Sales Tax Act and section 46 of the Federal Excise Act requires the giving of reasons.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

113 . Cr.Bail 222/2021 Ihsan Ali @ Ihsan chachar and others V/S The State Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur

114 . Cr.Bail 25/2021 Sultan Ahmed Rind and Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152368 ]
PROTECTIVE BAIL
Read more

115 . Const. P. 471/2020 Nasir Ali Zangejo V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152370 ]
Deceased Quota
Read more

116 . Cr.Rev 52/2021 Wali Muhammad @ Hajan and Others V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152369 ]
Against Order of Trial Court
Read more

117 . Const. P. 166/2020 Fayaz Ali Mastoi V/S Assistant XEN Irrigation Shahdadkot & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152371 ]
Irrigation Water
Read more

118 . Criminal Appeal 18/2021 Arsallah V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152430 ]
The present appellant has been convicted by the trial Court on the same set of facts and evidence, above mentioned, which this Court has not considered sufficient to warrant conviction of the appellants of Crl. Appeal No. 61 of 2016 and award them afore-mentioned sentences. So far the case of present appellant is concerned; we do not find any special features that distinguish his case/role from those of said appellants, justifying recoding conviction and sentence to present appellant. Hence, the present appellant is also entitled to the same benefit of doubt earlier extended in favour of appellants of Crl. Appeal No. 61 of 2016. Consequently, we allow this criminal appeal, set aside the conviction and sentences of appellant recorded by the trial Court vide impugned judgment and acquit him of the charges. He shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case
Read more

119 . II.A. 85/2019 Mst. Naz Bibi (since died) through her LRs V/S Wahid Bux (since died) through his LRs and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-HYD - 152447 ]
The impugned judgment and decree of the learned appellate Court are maintained to the extent of entitlement of respondent No.1 in respect of the amount of the National Savings Certificates left by the deceased along with profit thereon, however, according to his share as per Shariah ; and, the impugned judgment and decree are set aside to the extent of grant of 50% share to respondent No.1 in the severance grant, gratuity and benevolent fund of the deceased, which shall be paid expeditiously to the legal heirs of the appellant / widow as per the service rules and regulations of the respondent No.2-bank. Needless to say the above payments shall be in addition to the donation by the respondent No.2-bank and the death compensation of the deceased granted to the appellant / widow by the learned appellate Court which, having not been challenged by respondent No.1, has attained finality. This appeal is partly allowed in the above terms with no order as to costs.
Read more

120 . Cr.Bail 127/2021 Sabir Ali Khoso V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152434 ]
For the aforesaid reasons, the instant bail application merits no consideration is dismissed. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the case; dispose of the same preferably within two months from the date of this Order; and, it is made clear that the direction given by this Court in bail matters may not be taken lightly and valid reasons are to be assigned if the same direction is not complied with as now it is well-settled law that ???to have a speedy trial is the fundamental right of the accused being universally acknowledged???. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, a smooth methodology and Scheme for a speedy trial are provided whether it is held by the Sessions Court or Magistrate, in recognition of the said right of an accused person. This principle shall apply more vigorously to the trials before Special Courts, constituted under the CNS Act, or any other special law so that unnecessary delay, a much less shocking one in its conclusion is avoided in all circumstances. Any unreasonable or shocking delay in the conclusion of the trial, before Special Courts, would amount to the denial of justice, or to say, denial of fundamental rights to the accused, of speedy trial. On the aforesaid proposition. In this context, I am fortified with the decision rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Imtiaz Ahmed vs. The State (2017 SCMR 1194).
Read more

121 . Suit 390/2001 CAPT. TARIQ MEHMOOD MALIK. V/S P.A.L.P.A. Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152449 ]

122 . Suit 133/1998 MRS. PARVEEN MEHMOOD. V/S THAI AIRWAYS INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC CO. LT Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Civil Procedure Code CPC

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152448 ]
Matter:DECLARATION

123 . Cr.Bail 319/2021 Majid Ali V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152436 ]
For the above reasons, the applicant Majid Ali has made out a case for post-arrest bail in FIR No.42 of 2021, registered with Police Station Darri, District Larkana, for offenses punishable under sections 452, 376, and 511 P.P.C. Accordingly, the applicant is admited to post arrest bail; he shall be released in the aforesaid crime subject to furnishing his bail bond in the sum of Rs.50, 000/- (Fifty Thousand Ruprees) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Read more

124 . Const. P. 4604/2021 Sohail Hameed V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Constitution of Pakistan

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152292 ]
It is not only the petitioner for whom the respondents, including federal and provincial governments, have taken this decision but in fact the respondents in pursuit of their responsibilities to take care of the health of entire nation, have issued numerous notifications, circulars to curb the virus spread. Petitioner, instead of being supportive, is being troublesome in the smooth operation of effective measures undertaken by government. The government is primarily responsible to take care of health of 220 million citizens of Pakistan and hence the desire of one person being petitioner cannot supersede the demand of ever-growing spread of pandemic Covid-19. The Sindh Government has already taken steps and are monitoring it periodically under the umbrella of Sindh Epidemic Diseases Act, 2014. Section 3 of ibid Act enables the government to take strict measures as they deem fit and proper in case the provincial government feels the necessity of enforcing prescribed measures to curb the threatened situation. ---This Covid-19 is exceeding and spreading for a number of reasons that it is new virus meaning that no one has immunity for this virus. It is highly contagious, meaning it spreads fast. Its novelty meaning scientists are still not completely sure as to how it behaves since it is changing its form and producing different variants and since they have a very limited history to go on. It is being reported worldwide that Covid-19 will have its short medium and long term effects for general population, health care workers, patients and other citizens. As our general responsibility we need to think ahead of ourselves and think beyond and stop being selfish, not only for our survival but for the survival of our population. The only way is to support the health care system.
Read more

Matter:VACCINATION

125 . Cr.Bail 185/2021 Pathan Khan V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152438 ]
For the aforesaid reasons, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant vide order dated 30.4.2021 is hereby confirmed. However, the applicant is required to furnish further solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50000/- (Fifty Thousand Rupees) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar of this Court within one week from today.
Read more

126 . Const. P. 343/2021 Akhtar Peer Sarhandi V/S Executive Engineer Provincial Highways Dadu Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

127 . Cr.J.A 13/2016 Turab Ali V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

128 . Const. P. 4048/2021 Syed Khursheed Ahmed Shah V/S The State and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Accumulation of assets beyond known source of income
Read more

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

129 . Cr.Bail 237/2021 Ghazi Katohar and others V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152278 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

130 . Cr.Bail 242/2021 Ameer Bux @ Luqoo Bangwar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152280 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

131 . Cr.Bail 184/2021 Bhano Khan Hattar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152250 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

132 . Cr.Bail 272/2021 Bakhshal Abro V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152290 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

133 . Cr.Bail 212/2021 Ghulam Nabi @ Shuti Bhayo V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152277 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

134 . Cr.Bail 204/2021 Arz Muhammad Khosa V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

135 . Cr.Bail 191/2021 Mujeeb Rehman @ Mujahid V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152251 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

136 . Cr.Bail 165/2021 Azhar Ali Buledi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152286 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

137 . Cr.Bail 252/2021 Ahmed Ali @ Ali Bhutto and another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152248 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

138 . Cr.Bail 216/2021 Asghar Gahejo V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152249 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

139 . Cr.Rev 36/2021 Goro @ Gajan V/S Shahnoor Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

140 . Const. P. 399/2021 Ghulam Mustafa Bugti V/S S.E Operation Circle SEPCO Larkana & others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152372 ]
Transfer and Posting
Read more

141 . Suit 1608/2020 Seamax Marine Services V/S The Ministry of Maritime Affairs & others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152142 ]
Rule 48 of Public Procurement Rules, 2004.
Read more

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

142 . H.C.A 108/2021 Professor Dr. Lubna Ansari Baig V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152148 ]
Matter:AGAINST ORDER

143 . Criminal Appeal 45/2020 Allahdad Waswano V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152247 ]
Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Upto 7 Years)
Read more

144 . Cr.Bail 124/2021 Talib Hussain Chachar V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152284 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

145 . Cr.Bail 273/2021 Muhammad Ali Solangi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152288 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

146 . Cr.Bail 24/2021 Ali Hassan Jeho V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152289 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

147 . Cr.Bail 271/2021 Muhammad Ali Solangi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152287 ]
Post Arrest Bail
Read more

148 . Cr.Rev 32/2021 Abdul Sattar son of Jamaluddin Solangi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

149 . Cr.Bail 274/2021 Shamshad Ali Jakhrani V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

150 . Cr.Bail 259/2021 Mandost Malik V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana

151 . Cr.Bail 7/2021 Ghulam Mustafa V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152390 ]
In view of the above, the role of applicants with regard to commission of alleged offence requires further enquiry as envisaged under sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr. P.C. We; therefore, admit the applicants to bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) each and P.R. Bond in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Read more

152 . Cr.J.A 29/2016 Azmat Ali V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152387 ]
Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
Read more

153 . Const. P. 1307/2020 Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-HYD - 152088 ]
We have examined the layout plan, drawings and Google map of the project available on record, wherein the actual path of the project and the bigger curve proposed by the University have been distinctly shown. It is clear from the above that if the impugned alignment is altered by including the bigger curve proposed by the University, the overall length of the project will be increased by several kilometers, and a portion of the said proposed bigger curve will pass through the oil and gas fields of OGDC. In such an event, the cost of the project and the time required for its completion will be increased substantially, and the said oil and gas fields will be exposed to the public / commuters and heavy construction machinery which may result into a disaster. Therefore, in addition to the legal position discussed above, prima facie, the proposal made by the University does not appear to be practical and safe for the commuters, public at large and the people working at the said oil and gas fields. In view of the object, purpose and urgent need of the project, it shall be in the public interest that the same is completed expeditiously. As a result of the above discussion, C.P. No.1307/2020 and all the applications pending therein are dismissed ; and C.P. No.05/2021 is disposed of by directing the Government and the acquiring agency to complete the project and the land acquisition proceedings in respect thereof expeditiously and strictly in terms of the Act. There will be no order as to costs in any of the subject petitions.
Read more

154 . Cr.J.A 62/2018 Sadullah V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152388 ]
We have also observed that in case in hand the prosecution has failed to prove the safe custody of the recovered charas and its safe transmission to Chemical Examiner. The recovery of charas was allegedly affected on 20.10.2017 and the sealed samples were sent for chemical analysis on 23.10.2017; however, it is not known as to where and in whose possession the alleged samples were kept during intervening period. PW-1 Excise Inspector Gul Muhammad Bhutto, the complainant/ I.O has not furnished in his evidence any detail regarding safe custody of the alleged samples, therefore, no evidence is available in record to prove the safe custody of the recovered substance at the Excise police station and its safe transmission from said place to the office of Chemical Examiner. It has been held by the Apex Court in the cases of Abdul Ghani and others v. The State and others (2019 SCMR 608), Faizan Ali v. The State (2019 SCMR 1649), The State through Regional Director ANF v. Imam Bukhsh and others (2018 SCMR 2039), Ikramullah and others v. The State (2015 SCMR 1002) and Amjad Ali v. The State (2012 SCMR 577) that in a case where safe custody of the recovered substance or safe transmission of sample of the recovered substance is not proved by the prosecution through any independent evidence, it cannot be said with any degree of confidence that the prosecution had succeeded in proving its case against an accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Read more

155 . Cr.J.A 87/2019 Zamir V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 152389 ]
For the foregoing facts and reasons, we have not found any misreading or non-appreciation of evidence and any illegality or legal or factual infirmity in the impugned judgment so as to justify interference by this Court in recording sentence and conviction to appellant by the trial Court. Hence, instant criminal appeal is dismissed.
Read more

156 . Cr.Bail 284/2021 Asghar Khan son of Abdul Manan V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
The Sindh Prohibition of Preparation, Manufacturing, Storage, Sale and Use of Gutka and Manpuri Act 2019
Read more

157 . Suit 2581/2014 Mohsin Ahmad. V/S Nasreen Irfan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152047 ]
Stipulation in mortgage deed that mortgagee would become owner or vendee of the property if mortgage money is not paid, is a clog on the right/equity of redemption, repugnant to law and void.
Read more

Matter:ADMINISTRATION

158 . Suit 717/2010 AGAH ASAD ABBAS V/S MST.NASEEM IRFAN Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152048 ]
Limitation for an application for restoration of a suit dismissed for non-prosecution, is governed by Article 163 of the Limitation Act, not by Article 181.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

159 . Criminal Miscelleneous 365/2014 BILQEES D/O MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE & OTHERS V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:QUASHMENT

160 . Const. P. 4371/2020 Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151987 ]
Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-4371 of 2020 filed by Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin against Government of Sindh (vehicle number plats petition). The petition has been dismissed.
Read more

Matter:TENDER

161 . Cr.Rev 44/2021 Aijaz Daryan V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana
Set Aside Order
Read more

162 . Const. P. 3468/2021 M/s Kiran Food Products V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152074 ]
Import of betel nuts under Serial No.5 of Part-I and Serial No.155 of Part-III of Appendix B of Import Policy Order, 2020; has to be regulated by Plant Protection Department under the Quarantine Act and the Rules framed thereunder and not by the Customs department.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

163 . Const. P. 3673/2021 Arshad Ali Khan V/S FBR and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152007 ]
Maintainability of Petition against a Show Cause Notice; held not maintainable.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

164 . Const. P. 3268/2021 Rehan Arif V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152028 ]
Import of vehicle under personal baggage and payment of duty and taxes under Para 6 of Appendix E of the Import Policy order 2020
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

165 . Suit -819/2021 SYED GHULAM SARWAR SHAH V/S FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152009 ]
As a result of the above discussion, it is hereby held that the instant Suit is barred by limitation, and also under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, and Order VI Rule 4 CPC, and is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Accordingly, the Suit is liable to be dismissed with costs. Foregoing are the reasons of the short order announced by me on 08.04.2021 whereby this Suit and the listed applications were dismissed with costs of Rs.100,000.00 (Rupees one hundred thousand only). The amount of costs shall be deposited by the plaintiff with the Nazir of this Court within thirty (30) days, which amount shall be transferred / deposited forthwith by the Nazir in the bank account of Edhi Foundation.
Read more

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

166 . Suit 2576/2016 Abdul Karim Rathor & others V/S Muhammad Naeem & others Sindh High Court, Karachi
When matter can be addressed by an injunction, no need to appoint Receiver.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

167 . Suit 2345/2016 FAREED YOUNUS & OTHERS V/S MUHAMMAD NAEEM & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi
When matter can be addressed by an injunction, no need to appoint Receiver.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

168 . Suit 1234/2017 Muhammad Naeed. V/S Abdul Karim Rathor & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
When matter can be addressed by an injunction, no need to appoint Receiver.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

169 . Spl.Cr.Bail 29/2021 DAWOOD-UR-REHMAN S/O HAFEEZ-UR-REHMAN V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Bail granted in alleged offence under Section 156 of the Customs Act read with CNS Act, 1997.
Read more

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

170 . Cr.Bail 919/2021 TALHA S/O LIAQUAT ALI PARDAR V/S THE STATE Sindh High Court, Karachi
Bail in ATA Case.
Read more

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

171 . Const. P. 429/2021 Mst. Hira Imam Thr. Nawabzada Kamran Hussain Mugha V/S Hasan Khurshid Hashmi and another Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:FAMILY MATTER

172 . Criminal Appeal 3/2019 Dost Muhammad Thebo & Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151728 ]
Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Life)
Read more

173 . Criminal Appeal 88/2018 Hafeez Machi V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151731 ]
Against Order of Trial Court(Life)
Read more

174 . Criminal Appeal 7/2021 Ali Nawaz Lolai V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151729 ]
Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Upto 7 Years)
Read more

175 . Cr.J.A 61/2016 Saeedo @ Saindad V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151732 ]
Against Order of Trial Court(Life)
Read more

176 . Criminal Appeal 21/2020 Sanaullah & Another V/S The State Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151727 ]
Against Order of Trial Court(Narcotics Life)
Read more

177 . Suit 17/2021 MUHAMMAD JAMIL BABAR V/S SARA JALIL & OTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi
In view of the above discussion, it is hereby held that the instant Suit is maintainable and the same should be decided on merits. Resultantly, CMA No.6832/2021, filed by defendant No.1 for dismissal of the Suit, is dismissed with no order as to costs ; and, CMA No.7798/2021, filed by the plaintiff seeking permission to deposit the original documents of his vehicle in lieu of the amount ordered by this Court, having become infructuous in view of the deposit already made by him, is dismissed as such.
Read more

Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

178 . Const. P. 3520/2021 Zahid Hussain Shah Naqvi V/S Addl I.G Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151712 ]
official accommodation
Read more

Matter:ACCOMODATION

179 . Const. P. 8713/2017 Muhammad Nadeem A. Shaikh V/S Govt. of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152489 ]
The matter relates to the improvement of the safety and security measures of Keenjhar Lake as per directions given by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito in C.P. No.D-8713 of 2017 for ensuring the interest of tourists and the development made under the Court orders for safety measures during boat riding.
Read more

Matter:FOR ENQUIRY

180 . Const. P. 3309/2011 M/S Ibrahim Fibres Ltd V/S Prov. of Sindh and ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151733 ]
Infrastructure fee / cess levied vide Sindh Finance Act, 2017 applicable retrospectively w.e.f. 01.07.1994 is intra vires; all petitions stand dismissed to that effect; however, Insofar as the first four versions of law introduced through Sindh Finance Act, 1994, amended through Sindh Finance Act, 1996, the Sindh Finance (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, and the Sindh Finance (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2001 are concerned, their applicability on the petitioners who had litigated earlier and were Appellants in Sanofi Aventis(PLD 2009 Karachi 65), has attained finality and is a past and closed transaction, notwithstanding promulgation of its fifth version vide Sindh Finance (Amendment) Ordinance, 2006, further amended by The Sindh Finance (Amendment) Act, 2007 (Sindh Act No: II of 2007, and The Sindh Finance (Amendment) Act, 2009 (Sindh Act No: III of 2009);
Read more

Matter:INFRASTRUCTURE CESS

181 . Const. P. 5920/2015 Kainat Soomro and Ors V/S Province of SIndh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 152488 ]
Directions given by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito in C.P.No.D-5920 of 2015 to the I.G. Sindh for implementation of SOP for sampling and preservation of DNA samples in rape, sodomy and sexual violence cases.
Read more

Matter:IMPLEMENTATION

182 . Suit 789/2018 Mst. Nadia Shakeel & another V/S Shagufta Baqar & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151775 ]
There is no concept of amendment in the disposed of memo of petition for Letter of Administration in respect of ONE identified deceased on subsequent death of another person who was legal heir of the deceased whose petition has been disposed of prior to the death of the other person
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

183 . Const. P. 2201/2017 Muhammad Asif Ansari and Ors V/S Pakistan Televison Corp. and ORs Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151747 ]
the foremost questions involved in the present proceedings are whether the re-designation / induction of the private respondents as Producer Programs (G-5) was/is suffering from inherent disqualification under the PTVC rules, and whether the private respondents are holders of the public office, therefore, fall within the purview of sub-clause 1(b) (ii) of Article 199 of the Constitution and this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this petition?
Read more

Matter:QUO WARRANTO

184 . Const. P. 265/2020 Muhammad Salman Khan Baloch (Adv) V/S Syed Mustafa Kamal & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151711 ]
Judgment passed by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan in C.P. No.D-265 of 2020 (writ of quo warranto) filed by Mohammad Salman Khan Baloch against Syed Mustafa Kamal, Ex City Nazim (Mayor) of Karachi for his disqualification. The petition has been dismissed.
Read more

Matter:ELECTION MATTER

185 . Const. P. 3328/2012 National Bank of Pakistan V/S Auditor GEneral of Pakistan Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER

186 . Const. P. 4864/2020 Hasan Khursheed Hashmi V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:CANCELLATION OF PASSPORT

187 . Const. P. 1497/2020 Nasir Kamal V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151690 ]
PNSC is hereby directed to pay all the post-retirement benefits to the petitioner strictly in accordance with law without fail within fifteen (15) days and to submit compliance report to this Court through MIT-II within seven (07) days thereafter. For future as well as for cases pending for calculation and/or payment of post-retirement benefits, PNSC is further directed to ensure compliance of the directions given by the Hon???ble Supreme Court in Haji Muhammad Ismail Advocate (supra) and Province of Punjab, through Conservator of Forest, Faisalabad (supra) in letter and spirit The petition is allowed in the above terms with costs.
Read more

Matter:RETIREMENT BENEFIT

188 . M.A. 3/2021 M/s. Jiangsu Dajin Heavy Industry Co. Limited V/S Port Qasim Authority (PQA) and others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: General Clauses Act, 1897 (Section 24A), PPRA Rules, 2004 (Rule 36), PPRA Rules, 2004 ( Rule 25, 29, 30 and 31)

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151696 ]
- Indeed, it appears that it was more than a month after opening of the bid that the appellant made an attempt to rectify its material inability by furnishing a separate/counter bank guarantee from Bank AlHabib for both the tenders. This deficiency could not have been resurrected as by then the ship sailed. These belated attempts would have amounted to a modification of the tender documents, which is not permissible under Rule 31 of Rules 2004. Eventually only those whose technical bids were found to be in consonance with the terms of the invitation, were liable to be considered for further steps and were considered accordingly. -Petitioner being aware of the said tender conditions participated and having participated in the tender cannot challenge or dislike prerequisites meant for technical qualification. He could only expect judicious treatment within the playing rules however, it was too late for appellant when it realized that playing conditions were not palatable to it. The situation faced by appellant based on the aforesaid facts is not res integra as a number of judgments are in the filed covering the issue as settled law. - Even if I have to measure bidding terms on the touchstone of malice and mala fide, I would come out with understanding that these terms are for every one and not to exclude anyone. These are commercial transactions and decisions in this regard should base on strict compliance of terms of tenders whereas equity and fair play based on financial offer is not primary concern. Even if someone intends to impress by showing better financial offer, he has to qualify first on technical grounds. It is the overall impact till completion of job that needs serious consideration by procuring agency. Whether a bidder has the ability to deliver as per terms of tenders and having capacity to ensure project???s completion should be the primary concern of procuring agency. There is thus nothing which could lead to conclude that the process ended up in a decision of rejecting technical bid of appellant was flawed. - Any term within frame of law is also not open for a judicial review even under the hierarchy of procurement laws as Rule 25 enables the procuring agency to require bid security not exceeding five per cent of the bid price to be furnished by every bidder and procuring agency may save its effectiveness for a period as they required in terms of Rule 26.
Read more

Matter:AGAINST THE ORDER

189 . Const. P. 3184/2021 Tahira Haneef V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151713 ]
In the light of the above discussion, in our view, a deputationist could not be treated as an aggrieved person, because she has no vested right to remain on a post as deputationist forever or for a stipulated period and can be repatriated at any time to her parent department more particularly in the light of aforesaid decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court. Reference is also made to the case of Dr. Shafi-ur-Rehman Afridi V/s CDA, Islamabad through Chairman and others (2010 SCMR 378). Even otherwise she cannot continue to serve on deputation in Sindh Government after her removal from service by the parent department, as discussed supra.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

190 . Const. P. 1736/2013 Akhlaque Hussain Memon and Ors V/S Province of Sindh and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151695 ]
whether the post of Additional/Assistant Advocate General could be filled amongst District Attorneys as per the Sindh Law Officers (Conditions of Service Rules), 1940 as amended up to date; and, whether between the notification dated 10.5.2016 bearing S.REG:1(22)2015/117 and notification dated 9.4.2018 bearing S.REG.4(07)/2018 which one is to prevail; and, whether the service structure for Deputy District Attorney and District Attorney in Solicitor Department, Government of Sindh needs to be streamlined ?
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

191 . M.A. 44/2021 Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Ltd V/S The Court of District Judge, Khi (East) & another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Succession Act, Carriage By Air Act, 2012 (Rule 6 of 6th Schedule)

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151730 ]
Precisely the gist of law and the succession application provides that the litigation commenced for issuance of a certificate in terms of Rule 1, 2 and 6 of Sixth Schedule of the ibid Act 2012. It enabled one of the legal heirs of the deceased to pursue the proceedings on behalf of all legal heirs who sustained damages to claim compensation from the airline. -Respondent No.2 approached District Judge/ respondent No.1 for issuance of requisite succession certificate. The District Judge/ Respondent No.1 however in terms of order impugned in these proceedings treated such compensation as an asset left by the deceased/victim and by considering it as part of succession application and has taken action in terms of the impugned order, which action is being challenged by the appellant/PIA in these proceedings. I disapprove the observation of the District Judge to the extent whereby recovery process was initiated.
Read more

Matter:SUCESSION MATTERS

192 . Const. P. 2252/2019 Amara Gohar & Others V/S FED Of Pakistan & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-HYD - 152307 ]
SPSC CASE:By this common Judgment, we intend to dispose of the captioned constitutional petitions and at the same time address to the frequent causes compelling countless individuals to appears before this Court alleging nepotism, unjust, unfair and illegal conduct of the Sindh Public Service Commission. Facts of these petitions and prayers made to this court are summarized hereunder:
Read more

193 . Const. P. 3502/2021 Syed Babar Hashmi V/S Govt. of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151693 ]
We do not agree with the statement of the learned counsel for the Petitioner on the aforesaid assertions for the simple reason that compulsory retirement from service is a major penalty under service jurisprudence and falls within the ambit of expression terms and condition of service of the civil servant, therefore, the jurisdiction of all other courts is barred by the provision of Sindh Service Tribunals Act, 1973 read with Article 212(2) of the Constitution. On the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified with the decision rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme court in the case of Ali Azhar Khan Baloch vs. Province of Sindh [2015 SCMR 456]
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

194 . Suit 271/2021 Muhammad Asim V/S The Federation of Pakistan & Others. Sindh High Court, Karachi
Audit notice issued by the Commissioner beyond jurisdiction, could not be remedied by transferring the same to the Commissioner having jurisdiction.
Read more

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

195 . Suit 1784/2010 SHARAFAT ALI V/S MST. SHAHJAHAN BEGUM & ANOTHERS Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151817 ]
The Suit was liable to be dismissed in any event in view of the above-cited law laid down by the Hon???ble Supreme Court due to the plaintiff???s admitted failure in depositing the balance sale consideration in Court despite this Court???s order. Thus, the order dated 21.05.2018 of the dismissal of the Suit on both the grounds was fully justified, and the same is not liable to be recalled. Foregoing are the reasons of the short order announced by me on 01.06.2021 whereby the listed application was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Read more

Matter:SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

196 . Const. P. 269/2020 Muhammad Arif Memon V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151668 ]
Through this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondents be directed to issue notification in respect of his retirement and to pay his post-retirement benefits and outstanding salary.
Read more

Matter:PENSIONARY BENEFITS

197 . Spl. Cus. Ref. A. 150/2015 Collector of Customs V/S The Customs Appellate Tribunal Bench-III & another Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151667 ]
Customs:- Amnesty Scheme once granted; no further demand of 1% flood Relief Surcharge can be raised.
Read more

Matter:CUSTOM MATTER

198 . Const. P. 169/2020 Fajjar Din V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151659 ]
This Constitutional Petition has been filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari/ mandamus to call for the records relating to the Compulsory Retirement Order dated 01.11.2012 and Appellate Order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the respondent-Airport Security Force (hereinafter referred to as `ASF'), and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate services of the petitioner as an Inspector (ASF).
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

199 . Suit 1872/2016 Saleem Butt.. V/S Pakistan & others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151652 ]
Challenge to the vires of section 230(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 on the ground of delegation of excessive legislative power ??? not successful. While making such challenge, the Plaintiff had also to demonstrate infringement of a Fundamental Right. SRO 115(I)/2015 re the conferring of powers and functions on the DG I&I, was within the jurisdiction of the FBR. Effect of striking-down of same SRO by another High Court ??? discussed. The invoking of section 176 does not militate against the concept of deemed assessment under section 122 of the Ordinance. Malafides had to be pleaded with particulars.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

200 . Const. P. 4035/2019 Bashir Ahmed Kalwar V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151131 ]
Declare the supersession of the petitioner made by the Respondent No.02 / CSB and the competent authority through impugned order dated 06.06.2018 as illegal--Direct the respondents to consider the case of promotion of petitioner in BPS-20, in terms of original reference of December, 2016--when a civil/public servant is recommended for supersession by the Central Selection Board (CSB) and the recommendation of the CSB is approved by the competent authority, what is its effect, and whether supersession is punishment?
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

201 . Suit 2415/2016 Saleem Butt V/S Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151651 ]
Given the mechanism in-built in section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance, which includes the providing of reasons in writing to the taxpayer, the power conferred on the Commissioner to call for record under section 177(1) of the Ordinance, does not by itself offend Article 25 of the Constitution. The question then, whether such power has been used unlawfully, is different, and one that may vary with the circumstances of each case. While making such challenge, the Plaintiff had also to demonstrate infringement of a Fundamental Right. The invoking of section 177(1) does not militate against the concept of deemed assessment under section 122 of the Ordinance. Malafides had to be pleaded with particulars.
Read more

Matter:DECLARATION

202 . Const. P. 3310/2018 Muhammad Asad ul Rehman V/S Govt. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151229 ]
the petitioners are seeking regularization of their services against the quota reserved for deceased civil servants as provided under the Prime Minister???s Assistance Package for the Families of Government Employees, on the premise that their parents were serving in the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) on different posts, who passed away during their service.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

203 . Const. P. 3803/2020 Suhaila Hussain V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151615 ]
whether the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of her previous service rendered with effect from 1971 till her reinstatement/re-employment in the year 1990 or not?
Read more

Matter:PENSION

204 . Const. P. 4039/2018 Mansoor Ahmed and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
prayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)
Read more

Matter:PENSION

205 . Const. P. 1335/2019 Mansoor Ahmed and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
prayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)
Read more

Matter:DIRECTION

206 . Const. P. 645/2019 Muhammad Abbas Khan and Ors V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
prayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)
Read more

Matter:PENSION

207 . Const. P. 1116/2017 Paul Francis V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
prayed for referring the matter to the Hon???ble Chief Justice for formation of Larger Bench in terms of the decision of the Hon???ble Supreme Court in the case of Multiline Associates v. Ardeshir Cowasjee and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 423)
Read more

Matter:PENSION

208 . Const. P. 6244/2019 Azizullah V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151616 ]
Whether the Petitioner is qualified for the post of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 in Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh? ii) Whether the post of Head Master/Head Mistress in BPS-17 in Education & Literacy Department, Government of Sindh is to be filled by 80% by initial appointment through Sindh Public Service Commission (except contract employees) and 20% by promotion amongst the various categories of teachers having 7 years??? service in BPS-16?
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

209 . Const. P. 891/2019 M/s United Business Machines thr Muhammad Aslam V/S Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 15 )

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151531 ]
-Section 15(2)(vii) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979requires demonstration of elements such as (i) honesty of purpose and (ii) reasonableness. From the statement of landlord/owner for the purpose of eviction of a tenant on the ground of personal bona fide need only an honest intention is to be deduced and there is no other formula to adjudge good and bad faith, for the purpose of eviction on the aforesaid count. If the Court on the scrutiny of the evidence comes to the conclusion that it was an honest intention then it would be immaterial whether he remained successful in achieving the object or not that is whether his son or daughter would join him in the business after completing their education. This requirement would be immaterial in the sense that the intention of the father in evicting the tenant was an honest one.Good faith is an abstract term not capable of any rigid definition and ordinary dictionary meaning describes it as "honesty of intention". -The primary requirement and condition precedent for invoking provision of Section 15(2)(vii) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 claiming relief on the ground of personal bonafide need of landlord in good faith is that the landlord should be honest in his approach and sincerity of his purpose should be manifested by irreversible evidence and surrounding circumstances. - Sufficiency of accommodation either for a commercial/industrial activity or for residential purpose is to be adjudged best by the landlord himself and it may vary not only on case to case basis but also on the basis of nature of business that one intends to establish an honest idea about future growth of the business and its prospects. Someone may have an idea of establishing humongous business set up and he may or may not be successful in achieving his object and plan but what is 9important, as a test, is the honesty of intention and there is nothing on record in the shape of cross-examination of the landlord/owner to demonstrate that it was not an honest and genuine intention for extending and enhancing business for himself and for his family members.
Read more

Matter:RENT MATTER

210 . Const. P. 2068/2016 Gulistan Textiles Mills Limited V/S VIIIth ADJ Karachi South & Another Sindh High Court, Karachi

Topic: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance,1979 (Section 8 (Fair Rent))

[SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151532 ]
- Similarly, a presumptive view in respect of overall inflation and rate of taxes cannot be applied. The maintenance claimed to have been made/done by the landlord/respondent and in support thereof they have filed some accounts and debit vouchers but it pertains to a period w.e.f. March 2007onward. How these debit vouchers and maintenance bills are being applied to entire building and on what calculation and basis its ratio in terms of facilities provided to the premises is being applied, is inconceivable on the strength of the evidence available on record. Floor-wise true calculation is not provided. The presumptive analysis thus is beyond the domain and jurisdiction of the Rent Controller. The statistics in terms of inflation and maintenance charges should have been provided in statement recorded on oath and only then it could have been taken into consideration by the appellate Court. Filing plethora of documents disclosing them as debit vouchers in respect of maintaining the entire building is inconceivable. Statistics showing percentage of taxation over the building in question as well as maintenance as to be applied to entire building and has to be established statistically and not generally. Such data was not provided to Rent Controller. Taxation and maintenance are differently applied on ground floor and upper floors. - Similarly in presence of lease deeds of the same building between same landlord and tenant or between same landlord and other tenants, the reliance/applicability of rent or fair rent of other buildings in the adjoining locality should not have been applied as a priority, wherein respect of which direct evidence is available. When a building is operated by lifts there is not a serious degree of difference between second and third floor of the same building where premises are situated. - Though the Rent Controller while determining fair rent of the premises in question has taken a very conservative view by fixing fair rent at Rs.10/-per sq. foot, yet I am of the view that fair rent fixed by the appellate Court is on higher side. The Rent Controller and appellate Court were required to provide a cumulative effect of all those factors available under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 subject to availability of evidence though the quantum of inflation and the enhancement of taxation has not been statistically provided in terms of applicability of such claim/charges per sq. foot yet the other factors may contribute for the determination of fair rent. - The rise in cost of construction has also not been demonstrated statistically. It is only presumptive analysis that cost of construction rises with the passage of time, however, the witness is required to provide data of such rise in cost of construction through his affidavit or any expert witness. It is a difficult assignment but the requirement of law. This burden could be relieved had appropriate lease deeds of same building or of adjoining building having similar facilities could be cited in evidence. - Section 8(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 enables the Rent Controller to revise such fair rent on account of changes/ additions brought or improving the premises in question which is not the case here. Similarly, there cannot be an automatic enhancement at the rate of 10% per annum on the fair rent in terms of Section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. It provides a maximum cap of 10% per annum on the existing fair rent and not an automatic enhancement to its maximum. Such enhancement at any particular rate, which in any case should not be 10% per annum, is dependent on certain factors which were not decided in the application under section 8 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. Besides, there was no prayer for such enhancement under section 9 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979.
Read more

Matter:RENT MATTER

211 . Const. P. 2623/2021 Nabeel Rashid V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
Reasons assigned to the short order dated 23.4.2021 passed in C.P.Nos.D-2526 & 2623 of 2021 by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito with regard to the prayer for awarding School Assessed Grades rather than holding physical exams for A and AS levels and O level.
Read more

Matter:EXAMINATION

212 . Const. P. 2526/2021 Shumaila Salman Shah & Ors V/S Fed. of Pakisan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151513 ]
Reasons assigned to the short order dated 23.4.2021 passed in C.P.Nos.D-2526 & 2623 of 2021 by Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito with regard to the prayer for awarding School Assessed Grades rather than holding physical exams for A and AS levels and O level.
Read more

Matter:EXAMINATION

213 . Suit 778/2021 FAUJI OIL TERMINAL & DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED V/S PORT QASIM AUTHORITY & ANOTHER Sindh High Court, Karachi [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-KHI - 151809 ]
Injunction application dismissed
Read more

Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION

214 . II.A. 2/2018 Muhammad Umar & another V/S Sikandar Ali & Others Sindh High Court, Circuit at Larkana [SHC Citation: 2021- SHC-LRK - 151427 ]
Against Order of Trial Court
Read more

215 . Const. P. 3429/2020 Allah Warayo and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

216 . Const. P. 317/2020 Shoukatullah V/S The State through Chairman NAB & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.
Read more

Matter:BAIL AFTER ARREST

217 . Const. P. 1604/2021 Qayyum and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

218 . Const. P. 4015/2020 Asif Soomro V/S Fed. of Pakistan & Ors Sindh High Court, Karachi
............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.
Read more

Matter:SERVICE

219 . Const. P. 5999/2020 Muhammad Arif and Others V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi
............We fully agree with the contention of M/s Malik Naeem Iqbal, Saleem Khaskheli, Syed Shoa-un-Nabi, Muhammad Khan Lakho, Ms. Shazia Zafar, Muzafar Ali, Samiullah Soomro, Aamer Latif and Tariq Ahmed Memon, advocates that the issue involved in the instant petitions stand squarely covered by the decision of the High Court and the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. For ready reference Paragraph No.22 of the decision dated 30.09.2019, given in C.P No.D-5649/2018, is reproduced herein below:- ???22. In the light of facts and circumstances of the case discussed above and decisions rendered by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the aforesaid cases, the instant petition is hereby disposed of with direction to the Managing Director/Competent Authority of Respondent-Company to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their service, more particularly in the same analogy as decided by the Hon???ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Messrs. State Oil Company Limited vs. Bakht Siddique and others ( 2018 SCMR1181). The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this judgment and compliance report be submitted through MIT-II of this Court.??? We, therefore, dispose of all the petitions in view of the paragraph as noted above, however, we would like to clarify that our this order would not be applicable to those persons / petitioners who are neither the temporary employees of SSGC nor are being paid/hired via the contractors. Compliance report in respect of the above order ought to be submitted through MIT-II of this Court within three (03) months??? time. With these observations all the instant petitions stand disposed of.
Read more

Matter:REGULARIZATION