IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Constt: Petition No.D–1743 of 2016
DATE OF HEARING
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE
Mr. Justice Salahuddin
Abdul Mobeen Lakho,
For hearing of main
Date of hearing: 18.01.2023
Date of order:
Mr. Abdul Raqeeb, Advocate alongwith petitioner
Mr. Ali Raza Balouch, AAG
ABDUL MOBEEN LAKHO, J.- Through this constitutional petition, the
petitioner seeks release of salaries alongwith allowances and benefits.
2. The essential
facts mentioned in the memo of the petition are that petitioner being
disable approached the competent authority for his appointment as PST on
disable quota, such directions were issued by the competent authority to
respondent No.2 for appointment. Accordingly, respondent No.2 issued
appointment order for the post of PST on 20.04.2011 and on 21.04.2011 he
submitted duty report but till yet the salary of the petitioner has not been
released. Hence, he has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction
of this Court.
3. Notices were issued to
the respondents. According to learned AAG the appointment of the petitioner
found to be ineligible and bogus; hence, no case is made out.
confronted with the facts that posts were advertised in the newspaper, the
Counsel couldn’t satisfy regarding this question and answer that petitioner is
not at fault and is being penalized due to political differences from time to
time; hence, he is entitled for the relief as prayed.
similar petition was filed before this Court bearing No.D-3886/14 and on
perusal of the order passed by learned Division Bench of this Court in the
above petition reflects that 222 persons on teaching side and 20 of
non-teaching side were appointed without due process of recruitment. Whereafter
inquiry was also initiated and such appointments were found to be fabricated. The
Honourable Bench dismissed the petition while observing as under;
“Under the given
circumstances, when the legality of the petitioner’s appointment has been
denied by the competent authority and the and the order relied upon has been
found to have been a product of manipulation with consequent action having
followed as against the official with consequent action having followed as against the official culpable in that
regard, and as where such appointments have been declared to be illegal, which
itself has not been challenged by the petitioner, we are of the view that the
petitioner is not entitled to relief in terms of the petition, which is
accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs”.
appointment order of the petitioner has also been issued by the same Officer
and pertains to the same period. Since, an order has already been passed in
respect of identical appointment by the same officer and during the same
period, hence, we are bound by the said order.
view of hereinabove facts and circumstances of this case and the order already
passed by a learned Division Bench of this Court, we do not see any reason to
entertain this petition and grant the relief as prayed. Accordingly, this
petition stands dismissed.
J U D G E
J U D G E