IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH KARACHI
CP No.D-1069 of 2024
(Abdul Waheed and 06 others v. Province of Sindh and 04 others)
____________________________________________________________________
Date Order with signature(s) of Judge(s)
Before:
Justice Muhammad Saleem Jessar
Justice Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro
1. For hearing of CMA No.21367/2025
2. For hearing of CMA No.5018/2024
3. For hearing of main case
Date of hearing and
short order: 23.01.2026
Date of Reasons: 26.01.206
M/s. Faizan Hussain Memon and Muhammad Nasir, advocates for the Petitioners
Mr. Ali Safdar Depar, Assistant Advocate General, Sindh
Mr. Talha Abbasi, Advocate for Applicants/Interveners
O R D E R
Muhammad Saleem Jessar, J. Through this petition, the petitioners have claimed following relief(s):
i. Declare and hold that the failure of Respondents to treat the Petitioners as regular employees vis-à-vis grant of benefits of regular salary as per government pay scales as per their order of regularization, preparation of service books, seniority list, pension contribution, GP fund and non-payment of salary since July, 2023 is arbitrary, discriminatory, mala fide, illegal, unlawful, ultra vires the constitution, and in violation of principles of natural justice, equity and fairness;
ii. Direct the Respondents to create sanctioned posts through SNE or adjust the Petitioners on available vacant posts as per their regularization order dated 16.09.2020 and 20.10.2020 along with consequential benefits of a regular appointment;
iii. Restrain the Respondents, their servants, subordinates, agents and or any person(s) working through or under them from taking any adverse action against the Petitioners;
iv. Grant any other relief(s), which this Honorable court may deem appropriate and proper in the circumstances of the case”
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that pursuant to an advertisement dated 28.11.2005 published in Daily Kawish, the Petitioners applied for the post of Data Entry Operators and/or Naib Qasids during 2008 and 2011 in the project of Automation of Stamps & Registration, Board of Revenue, Government of Sindh. The Petitioners appeared in written test and interview and remained successful thus were appointed in service on contract basis; that the service record of Petitioners remained satisfactory; that upon promulgation of the Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc & Contract Employees) Act, 2013 (Act-2013), the Petitioners became entitled to regularization; however, failure of the Respondents to treat them as regular employees compelled them to approach this Court, by way of filing constitution Petition No D 1820 of 2015 and 1415 of 2015; that this Court disposed of petitions vide order dated 19.10.2016 directing the Respondents to consider the case of Petitioners for regularization; that non-compliance of Court’s orders led to contempt proceedings, during which the Respondents acknowledged completion of all formalities and recommended the Petitioners for regularization. Learned counsel argued that though the Petitioners were eventually regularized vide orders dated 16.09.2020 and 20.10.2020, such regularization was confined to project posts, with an assurance of adjustment against sanctioned posts upon completion of the project, which stood completed in June, 2023. Despite repeated correspondence by Respondent No.3, no sanctioned posts were created. It was further submitted that the Petitioners, despite rendering services for 13 to 16 years, are being treated in a discriminatory manner, have not been paid salary since July, 2023, and are deprived of all benefits of regular service, whereas similarly placed employees have been adjusted against sanctioned posts. Counsel alleged that vacant sanctioned posts of Data Processing Assistants (BS-14) and Naib Qasids (BS-02) are available against which the Petitioners can be adjusted. He prayed to allow the petition.
3. Learned Assistant Advocate General opposed the petition and contended that the Petitioners were engaged purely on contractual basis under the ADP project Automation of Stamps & Registration (ASR) in terms of PC-I, which stood completed on 30.06.2024. The completion report has been duly submitted through PC-IV and approved by the Planning & Development Department, Government of Sindh. It was submitted that the Petitioners are not entitled to regularization, as they do not fulfill the criteria prescribed under letter dated 16.09.2016 issued by the Services, General Administration & Coordination Department for consideration of cases under the Act-2013. It was further contended that the performance of the Petitioners remained unsatisfactory, and the project failed to achieve its desired objectives. Learned AAG argued that the Petitioners are seeking preferential treatment under the guise of equal treatment, which is impermissible, as the superior courts have consistently upheld the principle of equality before law. It was further contended that the claims of the Petitioners are based on misleading and fabricated assertions; moreover, two Petitioners namely Umerdin son of Salahuddin and Seenghar Ali in applications under order I Rule 10 CPC are alleged to have submitted forged documents, and against them recommendations for registration of FIR and recovery of emoluments have been made by the then Senior Member, Board of Revenue, Sindh. It was lastly contended that regularization of contractual or ad-hoc employees is subject to availability of sanctioned posts, continuity of service, and satisfactory performance, as envisaged under Rule 4(1) of the Sindh Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion & Transfer) Rules, 1974. On these grounds, learned AAG prayed for dismissal of the petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. From scanning of the material available on record, it transpires that the petitioners were appointed under a project in the Revenue Department in the year 2008; the project of the Revenue Department continued until 2023. The petitioners were appointed through due process of law through advertisement and the requisite test and interview as mentioned in the advertisement available at Pages 23 & 25 of the petition. Pursuant to the Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc & Contract Employees) Act, 2013, the petitioners filed representations with the Department, which were not considered; therefore, they preferred petitions bearing CPs No.D-1820 & 1415/2015, which were disposed vide orders dated 19.10.2016 and 19.12.2016. For ease of reference, Para-4 of the order dated 19.10.2016 passed in CP No.D-1820/2015 is reproduced below:
“4. As a result of above discussion, this petition is disposed off with the directions to the respondent No.2 to forward the names of petitioners to the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh, so that their cases may be sent for consideration to the Scrutiny Committee constituted to deal with the cases of regularization under the Act, 2013. This exercise shall be completed within sixty days. At this juncture the learned AAG argued that sixty days time will be reckoned from the date of sending names by the respondent No.2, which argument seems to be logical and approved. The Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh shall ensure that as soon as the names are received from respondent No.2, he will pass on the same to the Scrutiny Committee constituted to deal with the cases of regularization for their consideration and the petitioners be intimated accordingly.”
6. It appears that the above order of this Court was not complied with, therefore, contempt application was preferred wherein the representative of the Board of Revenue appeared and filed compliance report that the orders passed by this Court were complied with, however, the said compliance report appeared to be an eyewash and an attempt to hoodwink the due process of law as on expiry of the project in year 2023, the petitioners were denied the payment of salaries on the count that their regularization was subject to availability of post. It will be pertinent to notice that the summary for regularization of the petitioners was moved, wherein they were allowed to continue work in the project and on completion of the project, it was observed that their services will be regularized by creating new posts against sanctioned new expenditure.
7. The Respondents in compliance to the Court’s earlier orders passed in CPD 1820/2015 proposed a summary to Chief Minister Sindh proposing for creation of SNE on completion of project. For the sake of convenience, Para 7 of the Summary for Chief Minister Sindh for regularization is reproduced below:
“07. In view of the above facts, the Honorable Chief Minister Sindh may be pleased to approve that the six employees, as under, may work in the Project of Automation of Stamps & Registration, Board of Revenue, Sindh, and they shall draw their salaries against the revised PC-1 Budget of the Project till the completion of the project and after the completion of the project their services may be regularized by creating new posts against Sanctioned New Expenditure (SNE).
The names of qualifying plaintiffs are as under:
(01). Mr. Ghulam Ali s/o Zafar Ali (Diploma in Information Technology)
(02). Mr. Muhammad Azeem S/o Muhammad Bux (Master of Computer Science)
(03). Mr. Sheeraz Ahmed S/o Bashir Ahmed (Bachelor of Computer Science)
(04). Mr. Suhail Ahmed S/o Barkat Ali Chandio (Diploma in Information Technology)
(05). Mr. Zahid Hussain 5/o Nawab Hussain Chandio (Diploma in Information Technology)
(06). Mr. Abdul Waheed S/o Abdul Rasheed Kalwar (Master of Information Technology)”
8. The Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc & Contract Employees) Act, 2013 was a beneficial piece of legislation which aimed to regularize services of the project employees working in the project of the Government of Sindh. The petitioners admittedly were employees working in a project, aimed at the automation of the Revenue record, as such the petitioners being the employees of project discharged duties in connection with the affairs of the Province of Sindh. Section 3 of the Regularization Act, 2013, provided that an employee appointed on adhoc or contract basis in the government or in its project in connection with the affairs of the province; in grade 1 to 18 who is otherwise eligible for appointment on such post shall be deemed to have been validly appointed on regular basis. For the sake of convenience, Section 3 of the Regularization Act, 2013, is reproduced below:
“3. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Act or rules made thereunder or any decree, order or judgment of a court, but subject to other provisions of this Act, an employee appointed on adhoc and contract basis or otherwise (excluding the employee appointed on daily-wages and work-charged basis), against the post in BS-1 to BS-18 or equivalent basic scales, who is otherwise eligible for appointment on such post and is in service in the Government department and it’s project in connection with the affairs of the Province, immediately before the commencement of this Act, shall be deemed to have been validly appointed on regular basis.”
9. It is crystal clear from the above provisions of law that the respondent department was left with no option but to regularize the service of the petitioners. The stance of the learned AAG that the services of the petitioners were regularized in a haphazard manner or till the continuity of the project has no force as directions contained in the orders dated 19.10.2016 and 19.12.2016 were specific in nature. The legislative intent in itself is very much clear that any employee working on adhoc or contract basis in the project in connection with the affairs of the Province of Sindh stood regularized. The stance of the Respondent Department that the performance of the Petitioners was not satisfactory also appeared to be an afterthought plea as pursuance to this Court’s earlier orders cases of Petitioners were examined and they were found eligible for appointment and duly recommended for regularization.
10. This is a case of severe hardship for the petitioners, as they were discharging duties in a project of government of Sindh since last more than 12 years. In between through Regularization Act of 2013 services of other employees working under the project were considered and regularized, but petitioners were discriminated and singled out without any explanation. The Respondent employer being government department is required to demonstrate fairness in the matters of employees and ensure that the employees are treated in accordance with law, the dignity as to their life and liberty is respected and no action resulting in exploitation of services is taken. In the case of Petitioners they were not given treatment in accordance with law, continued services on contract basis despite of the statutory protection for regularization resulted in exploitation, the Petitioners were meted out with discriminatory treatment which offended their fundamnetal rights guaranteed under article 4, 9, 11, 25 and 27 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, of 1973. Since the services of the petitioners were already regularized and it was stated in the summary that on expiry of contract a new SNE shall be created for accommodating the petitioners, therefore, denial of regularization to the petitioners on expiry of the contract was beyond the bounce of law, illegal, without any lawful authority making the case for indulgence of this Court to exercise powers of judicial review.
11. In the wake of the above discussion, this petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to issue regularization orders of the petitioners and pay them arrears of salaries within a period of (60) days from the date of this order.
12. So far as CMA No. 21367 of 2025 is concerned, the disputed questions of law and facts are involved as such the CMA stands dismissed. The applicant may prefer a fresh petition if so advised.
13. These are the reasons for the short order dated 23.01.2026, whereby this petition was allowed and the application bearing CMA No. 21367 of 2025, filed by the interveners, was dismissed with liberty to file a fresh petition.
JUDGE
HEAD OF CONST. BENHCES
JUDGE
Approved for reproting