ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D-        787 of 2009.

DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1-     For Katcha Peshi

2-     For hearing of CMA.No.2268/2009 (Stay)

 

19th. January, 2016.

 

Mr Ghulam Shabbir Dayo, Advocate for petitioners.

Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, Addl: A.G

Mr. Noor Hassan Malik, Asstt: A.G.

 

                        Through instant petition, the following reliefs have been sought by the petitioners:-

(a)  That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare that the act of the Respondents No.2 to 4 regarding stoppage of salaries of the petitioners since 2002-2003 till today is illegal, malafide, ultra vires, without lawful authority and in violation of legal and fundamental rights as guaranteed under the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973.

 

(b)  That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare that due to lack of show cause notice or termination letter, if any, the petitioners are deemed to be continuously in service, hence they are entitled for the release of their salaries.

 

(c)  That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant mandatory injunction thereby direct the Respondent No.4 to release the salary of the petitioners as claimed by them, till disposal of this petition.

 

(d)  To award the costs of the petition.

 

(e)  Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

 

                        Notices were issued, pursuant to which comments have been filed on behalf of official respondents, wherein the claims of the petitioners have been seriously denied and disputed and it has been stated that the documents furnished by petitioners regarding their alleged appointment with the respondents are forged and bogus. Objection with regard to maintainability of instant petition has also been raised by learned Addl: A.G who submits that instant petition besides involving disputed facts also suffers from latches which has not been explained, whereas, according to learned Addl: A.G, instant petition has been filed after the lapse of about 08 years from the date of their alleged appointment in the year, 2002-2003 and when the salary of petitioners was allegedly stopped by the respondents. It has been further stated that if claim of petitioners is accepted that they are civil servants, they are required to approach the Service Tribunal for redressal of their grievance, whereas, instant petition is not maintainable in terms of Article 212 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

 

                        While confronted with such factual and legal position, the learned Counsel for the petitioners could not submit any response, however, an inquiry may be directed to be conducted in respect of the claim of the petitioners and the respondents may be directed to scrutinize all the documents / service record of the petitioners by associating the petitioners and provide opportunity to explain their case. It has been contended that the petitioners will seek their remedy in accordance with law in case of any adverse report in this regard.

 

                        In view of hereinabove facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the instant petition is misconceived and is not maintainable on the point of latches, whereas, seriously disputed facts have been agitated by petitioners. Moreover, the matter pertains to terms and conditions of employment which cannot be examined by this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 in view of bar as contained under Article 212 of the Constitution. However, since petitioners have reportedly not been issued any show cause notice or termination order as alleged in the instant petition pursuant to their alleged employment with the respondents, we deemed it appropriate to direct the petitioners to approach the concerned authority with their claim along with relevant documents, which may be examined strictly in accordance with law and rules, thereafter proper order may be passed after conducting inquiry into the allegations as contained in the instant petition. Petitioners may be at liberty to seek any further remedy against any adverse order as per Law.

                        Petition stands dismissed in the aforesaid terms along with listed application.

JUDGE

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI