IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Constt. Petition No: D- 32, 46, 72, 186, 311, 647, 980, 1624,

and 2088 of 2010.

******

Present:

                                                Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui.

                                                Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Farooq Shah.

~~~~

            Mr. Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro, Advocate,

            Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, Advocate,

            Mr. Ali Azhar Tunio, Advocate,

            Mr. Shamasuddin Abbasi, Advocate,

            Mr. Saleem Raza Jakhar, Advocate, 

            Mr. Inayatullah Morio, Advocate for respondents No. 3 and 4.

            Mr. Muhammad  Yaqoob Dahani, State Counsel for A.A.G.

Date of hearing:                    17.01.2013.

Date of Order:                       17.01.2013.

O R D E R

Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, J-.                It is agreed by the counsels that the question involved in these petitions is similar to that which is involved in C.P. No. D-249 of 2010, which was disposed on 22.02.2012.  The operative part of the judgment is as under:

                                    “Consequently, this petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to process the cases of the petitioners for regularization. If any of the petitioner is not qualified for the job to which he has been appointed, he should be given a show-cause notice and after due disciplinary process action may be taken against him in accordance with the rules. Similarly if a particular petitioner has been absent from duty action may also be taken against him in accordance with the rules. The petitioners are entitled to all the back wages. The entire exercise should be completed within three months but current salary should be paid at the same time as it is paid to other employees.”

            All the learned Counsel appearing, agreed that these petitions since involves similar question be disposed in the same terms. Order accordingly. However, in addition to the disposal of petition in the above terms, learned Counsel for respondents No. 3 and 4 submits that some of the petitioners are those against whom the respondents have grievance that they were not the employees and that they got the benefit on the basis of some forged and fake letters. Only to that extent, those petitioners who in view of the respondents have been appointed or given benefit on the basis of fake and forged documents, the respondents may probe and enquire after issuing them show-cause notices and all those petitioners would be at liberty to provide all the relevant documents including appointment letters, which issue shall be decided after thorough enquiry and after passing speaking order. The fact that all those petitioners were working in terms of the order dated 26.12.2009, whereby the services of the petitioners were regularized be also taken into consideration. This exercise shall be carried within two months. The question of salaries which are deposited with Additional Registrar of this Court will be decided, once the query is resolved by the respondents. No further extension will be given to the respondents except above period of two months. Such report shall be submitted to this Court through Additional Registrar. 

            In view of the above these petitions are disposed of.

Judge

Judge