Sindh High Court

Mazhar Ali Chandio & another (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)

Case
Const. P. 1753/2010
Type
Writ Jurisdictions
Bench
Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi
Length
2 pages

Full judgment

Official copy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD

C.P. No.D-1753 of 2010

Present:

Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon

Mazhar Ali Chandio & another ---------- Petitioners

VERSUS

Province of Sindh & others -------- Respondents

Date of hearing and Decision: 22.09.2020

Mr. Saeed Shams Memon advocate for petitioners.

Mr. Allah Bachayo Soomro, Additional Advocate General Sindh

ORDER

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J. Through the above captioned Petition, the Petitioners are seeking their appointments as Junior Clerk BPS-07 and regularization of their services in view the equality of the citizens as many other employees have already been regularized

2.Petitioners have submitted that they were serving in Sindh Irrigation Department in RBOD Project-II at Jamshoro as Junior Clerks on work charge basis. The petitioners filed a constitutional petition No.D-346/2009 against the respondents claiming their further employment and regularization of their services and salaries. Respondent No.4 had stated in his comments that 90% work of the project is stopped due to lack of funds and in future if any project is received, the petitioners will be appointed on priority basis and then said petition was dismissed in limini with direction to respondents to appoint the petitioners in future on priority basis. Petitioners have been approaching the respondents for their appointments but they are being kept on false hopes.

The petitioners of C.P.No.1127 of 2010 and 198 of 2011 have been appointed and regularized their services on the direction of this court. In C.P.No.426 of 2009 this court vide order dated 23.12.2009 directed the respondents to firstly appoint the employees of work charge/contingency, however, the petitioners are being neglected by the respondents.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Text extracted from the court's PDF and reflowed for reading. The court's official copy is authoritative.

Closest in subject matter, from every court in the library.

Please confirm