IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SINDH, KARACHI
Const. Petition No. 1779
of 2016
Dr. Abdul
Qadir Akhund and 03 others
..
.
.Petitioners
Versus
Province of
Sindh and 06 others
......Respondents
Date of Hearing & Order :- 20.03.2017
Mr. Jan Ali Junaijo, advocate for the petitioners
Mst. Shehla Parveen, respondent No.5, in
person
J U D G M E N T
FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J: In the instant
petition, the petitioners have sought the following reliefs :-
A) That this court may be pleased to restrain the respondent No.5 not to
move any false applications against the petitioners;
B) That this court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to 4 not to
entertain any false complaint of the respondent No.5;
C) That this court may be pleased to restrain the respondent No.5 and 6
from creating harassment in the service of the petitioners as well as restrain
from visiting the office of the petitioners i.e., Medical Centre;
D) Any other relief or reliefs which may deem fit and proper under the
circumstances of the case.
2. It
appears from the contents of the petition as well as prayer clauses made
therein that the main grievance of the petitioners is against respondent No.5
and 6. Respondent No.5 and 6 filed their objections on the petition in which
they denied the allegations and levelled counter allegations against the
petitioners.
3. Learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent No.5 is the wife of
respondent No.6 and she was a member of aircrew as Airhostess but now she has
been declared a ground staff and posted in a school in violation of the rules.
According to him, now being a member of ground staff, respondent No.5 is not
entitled to avail medical facility at hospital as the medical centre is meant
for aircrew members only. He has submitted that instant petition may be allowed
as prayed, and respondent No. 5 and 6 may be directed not to cause harassment
to the petitioners
by leveling false allegations as they have initiated false cases and moved
false applications against the petitioners.
4. Respondent
No.5 appeared in person and submitted that being a lady, she is unable to
harass the petitioners and in fact she is being harassed by the petitioners.
She further submitted that whenever she or her husband visited medical centre,
the petitioners did not treat them properly and they did not allow them to
enter into medical centre and to get treatment. According to her, not only she
but also her husband, children and parents are entitled to avail medical
facility at medical centre.
5. I have heard
the arguments and gone through the material placed before me. It appears that
the petitioners and respondent No.5 are antagonized to each other on account of
certain disputes. In her objections, respondent No.5 has levelled allegations and
it also appears that FIRs were lodged by the parties against each other. As far
as the prayer clauses are concerned, the major portion of the same is actually pertaining
to administration of PIAC but in the instant petition, PIAC is not a party in
any capacity. The petitioners have admitted that respondent No.5 is basically a
member of aircrew of PIAC and if under the law, she is allowed to avail medical
facility then she cannot be restrained from availing her legal right. As far as
prayer clause regarding restraining respondent No.5 and 6 from lodging false
complaint is concerned, no one is supposed to initiate false case and being a
citizen of state of Pakistan, the petitioners and respondent No.5 and 6, both,
have to act strictly in accordance with law. However, respondent No.5 and 6 are
directed not to take law in their hands and all their acts and deeds should be remained
strictly within parameters of law. With these observations, instant petition is
disposed of.
J U D G E