C.P.No.D-664 of 2016

 

 

1.    For orders on office objection

2.    For Katcha Peshi

3.    For hearing of CMA-1782/2016

 

 

31.03.2016

 

Mr. Shamsuddin Rajper advocate for petitioners.

Mr. Shafique Ahmed Leghari, State Counsel.                                                                           ....................

                        Through instant petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief:

 

(a)  To declare that the act of the respondent No.6 thereby mis-observing the lawful order of this Hon'ble Court dated 03.03.2015 and inquiry report of the respondent No.3, and issuing the impugned order dated 18.12.2015 without any show-cause notice to the petitioners or otherwise, is illegal, improper, ab initio void and against the principles of natural justice, hence the same may be declared as null and void.

 

(b)  To direct the respondents to appear in person before this Court and strictly inquired that either they have complied with the orders of this Hon'ble Court dated 03.03.2015 in its true letter and spirit, or just removed burden from their shoulders and also saved skin of involved delinquent officials, resulting which they have thrown the services of trained and eligible petitioners including other 174 employees into dustbin.

 

(c)  To grant interim injunction thereby suspending the operation of impugned order dated 18.12.2015 issued by the respondent No.6 by falsely giving reference of the order of this Hon'ble Court including inquiry report of the respondent No.3, till final disposal of instant petition.

 

            Notices were issued, pursuant to which comments have been filed, wherein it has been stated that the petitioners have been removed from service pursuant to orders dated 03.03.2015 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CPD-483/2015 and others as well as on the basis of inquiry conducted by DIG Munir Ahmed Shaikh on the direction of this Court in the above petitions, therefore, after conducting the inquiry, the petitioners along with other 174 police constables have been removed from their services.

 

            Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that neither any order was passed against the petitioners in the above cited petition nor as per report furnished by DIG Munir Ahmed Shaikh contains any adverse finding with regard to appointment of petitioners, therefore, reference to such inquiry and decision of this Court in the aforesaid petition, is totally misconceived.

 

            Learned counsel was confronted as to maintainability of instant petition in view of Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, whereby it has been held that a petition does not lie against an adverse order relating to terms and conditions of a civil servant, in response to which learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the petitioners have filed appeal/ representation before the concerned DIG, who has forwarded the same to the IG Sindh, however, since no orders have been passed on such appeal/representation, therefore, the petitioners having no other remedy, have approached this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 for redressal of their grievance. It has been prayed that IGP may be directed to examine the contention of petitioners and pass appropriate order at an early date.

 

            We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record with their assistance. In view of hereinabove legal position, we would dispose of instant petition, with directions to the petitioners to continue to pursue the Departmental remedy as already availed for seeking redressal of their grievance in accordance with law, whereas, DIG/IG Sindh is directed to decide such appeal/ representation of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law, after providing opportunity of being heard, however, keeping in view the facts as stated by the petitioners in the instant case to the effect that there is no adverse finding either in CPD-483/2015 or in the detailed inquiry report submitted by the DIG Munir Ahmed Shaikh, which according to learned counsel for the petitioners, has been wrongly made basis while issuing the impugned orders.

 

            Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, along with listed application.

 

 

                                                                                JUDGE

                                               

JUDGE

N.M.