Muhkamuddin and Others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

R,3"I";,J*; ^rs ^+L a- rlflhf ,€-?1.+*, L^r*--\. Co\, S l lr

CER TIFICATE OF THE HIGH COTJRT OF' S INDH. KARACHI-

F Constitution Petition No. D-5543 ot'2A23

Muhkamudin & others

Vs.

!. The Province of Sindh & Another

HIGH COURT OF SNDH

Comoosition of Bench. D/8.

Mr. Justice Mohamrnad Karim Khan Agha Mr. Justice Adnan Karim Memon

Dates of hearing :24-12-2024

Decided on :24 -12-2024

(a)Judgment approved for Reporting Yes t

CERTIFICATE

Certified that the judgment */Order is based upon or enunciates a pringiple of law */decides a question of law which is of first impressio#distinguishes/. Over-rules/ reversesiexplains a previous decision.

* Strike out whichever is not applicable.

NorE: - (i) This slip is only to be used when some action is to be taken.

(ii)If the slip is used, the Reader must attach it to the top of the first page of the judgment.

(iii)Reader must ask the Judge writing the J t whether the Judgment is approved for reporting.

l

(iv)Those directions which are not to be used should be deleted.

I

3t"

I

INTHE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Const. Petition NO: D- *(s lffi*r.,rrtutt. of . '. . t

inf iir rristrar {Writ

L MUHKUMUDDIN S/O WAHID BUX

Muslim, Adult, R/o Village Abdul Aziz Khan, Taluka & District Kashmore

2. PEERAL S/O SHAZADO

Muslim, Adult, R/o village Golimar, po wakroo, Kandhkot, Taluka Kandhkot, District Kashmore t a J. SHAH BUX SlO SHAHZADO

..HT

Muslim, Adult,R/ o Village Sahid Khan Lashari, Taluka Kandhkot, District Kashmore.,,,... ...,.PETITIONERS r,rl

L VERSUS

1.. PROVINCE OF SINDH

B Through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Sindh, Karachi *,

o Lt SECRETARY (PWbS) Population Welfare Department, Govt. of Sindh, Sindh Secretariat, Karachi a

J. DIRECTOR GENERAL (PWDS)

Population Welfare Department, Govt. of Sindh, Sindh Secretariat, Karachi..... ........ ...r.. ..,.,. e .....RESpONDENTS

I

CONSTITUTIONAT P ETITIONUNDER

ARTICLES 199 OF THE C OI{STITUTIOI{ OF

ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN L973

I,I

- OI{I]EIT SI-tE,ET

IN TI.IE I-IIGH COUITT OF SINDH AT I(A C]L.II

C.P No.D-5543 of 2023 (lr.'luhkunrtrddiu arrtl olhcrs v. Province ol'Sirrrlh arrd others)

IJatu= Orclel With Signature Ot .luclge

t Reforc:

h4r, .lustice Muh I(arim lthan Agha N4r'. .l rrsticc Adtrart-ul- arirn Merrtou

I)irtc rrl'lrcuring :rnrl ortlcr: - 24.12.2tl.74

IVlr. Sanrrullah Sooutro, advocate 1-or tlte pe titionct's.

N4r'. Ati Safdar Depar'. Assistant Advocate GeneraI Sindl- . ancl Shoaib Sicldiqui. Dcputy lJirector Po1:ulation We[hre I)epitrtttrent. Covemn enI o1'S incilr.

ORDEIT

h'lrrharnrnad l(arirn I(han dghit,,_Jt Tltror-r gh this constitr"rtionaI petition, ltetitionels have prayecl ris lbl lows:-

o This Hon'ltle Cottt'l rncr.1,he pleor^ei to direct respontlurl.r lVr:. I trt 3 171 1'1'grrlrtt'i:r' t thc :;en,ict:.t r1f'thc petitiottct'.\ ott their respcclit'eipo.tls i.e. F*ntil.r'.'l.r.vi.rlrrrtr II'el./hre (A,tde) (RPS-05) rl ('hrnrkiclttr (B[',\-0]) .r0 ul.trt r(lerrsa their sttlilrit'.t -l'ltL ittttnt'tlirtlitl)' ttn,ltt' lltr' .[,'l ktt,/li// r/.\ .\itt,llt t /i t'.qtrlttt'i-,iiiutt ol . l,i/tr,,',I ( r,tilt'tlt't l:.tttltlt)l t't'\/ 1r'1 'tl I .l

l) ..tll the rcsltontlant.v :ihuuli hc dircctccl to pu.t' oll l,ortt.tI uncling^Stl uric.\ to t l te t- ltetit ioners. l!

,rt

C 7'o grant interim injunctiott lhereb.1, ilirectittg respol hdents No.l to J rutl t0 tlke rtn.y 61slys,':;e nctiott ctbottt the servit:es o.f'lltc petitiotl'lcr:;, till 'lhtt lind dislttt:;ttl ol' i t lre in.tttnt pet it iott. I

-j

2.Petitioners were appointed as Faurily Welfare Atssistant (BPS-05) ancl Clrcrrvl<idnr (llPS-02) in 2011-2012, ser\/ecl for years, ancl received resular salaries. Despite other employees' regularization under thle 2013 Act. petitioners

I

\ ;cre clrrclareci "excess" enrployees. an(l their \!ilgcs rvcle s[tt pped.'l'hey allcgc lhis clecision \vils politically ntotivilted to rlenv tlrr-'nr regularizttion. The resulat'iz.rtliort

I

o1'Ihe set'\/icc of the Petitioners is [rasc-d Ltpotl theil lengIh ol'sen'ice Ihcv ltirt'c rvor'ltetl lbr tlre Ilespondents since 2U1l ilrlcl it is on the {trove principle that the i

I

llctitioncrs hilve approached this CouLt Ibr rcg ruliu'izatiotr ul' t[rcrr servicc ruttlct' Article.s 9 and 25 of the Constitution of the Islarlic Rep blic ol'Pakistan. Thev I relied Lrporl the ot:servation rlrade b1, the Su1:r'eure Court o l'akistan in the cttse ol' cle 0n0 (2013 SCh,l I{ 1205). an(l asscrted that Llncler Article 5 ril'tlie C-lonstitu 0n, lt rs illl llllllcl'iltl\c olrligation of the functionaries of the State to abicle by the Constitution ancl the ,i lau,. Counsel for the petitioners further urgecl that petitioners are int;roverishccl cluc to lriglr irrflatiorr. nlnking sur'\,ivi.rl clitlLcrrtt. I-lespit{ cliligently pertirnring ,l llie ir titrtics. r'rrspontlcrtt.s ricclirrt:tl tlrurir "rr\ cr'-strurrgf lr" [() irrstilr r,"'t't iee -l'lris I

terrttrrtirtion" liltelr to Iavor"other irrclir itltrlls. actir-ltt i S i I lcgll. rlral iciotts. itrtil

\ 3ll

r coi'urc:cl b.r' tlrc .lirdgnreut rendcrecl in thc case o1' the ilt't:t'ntttenl 0 Klt h(t : Ptrkhttutkhtru und others' l/,s. Adnanulluh tncl others (2 16 SCMR 1375), l)ir lrnrr.rn Saii(t uncl olher,v Vs. Mctnct{ing Direclor"/General Arlcrntrfrer (Alanu.qrt' i

!!rual_t9_!9kphone Infitstri.es ri' Puki.s'tcut ttnd others (2015 SCMR 1257). lhu cirse oJ' hdttl G o0r 'rrd olhers l./,v. 'ilre Pre irlenl o lltc hrrt l0 o l)(tl{i,\'t(tn (utd othcrs (2018 SCMR 157) irncl (201B SCMIt 325)

f i. l.cirnrccl Assistelrt A.C. hits op;-rosccl the petitioir. arguing that exccs:i unrl)[or ucs uilnr)ot [rc rcguIirriecd trs irr tlre l)r'ilscrrl cir.se ,,1,, 1r,,tlliu irtlr ct'tirunrurit ii,r'tltr' Irtrsts \\irs tttiltlu: ltntl tltcrr' \\,*'r'u rI() r'cc()nll)r'lrrll|tirltrs lrtrttt ll .sr'lr'etiutr cr)nlnrittee. lJe.sides, lhere rvas/is rro apprcrval li'orn tlrc cdrrtpctenI arLrthurit\.:.rrtri the alrpoirrtnrents were made withorrt sanctionecl streugtli or vacancies. He saicl that thc rJornicile certiflcates o{' some o1' the petitiorrer',s rvere/are liortt otltirr'

I

clistricts. FIe next argued that the Irolice verificution $f appoirrtees vvls uut i

coucluctecl. He sulrrrritted that the petiiloners have not pertormed their duties siuce 2016. Lastly, he stressecl. the point that all appointrr*n{, exceedecl sanctionetl

I

stren-rrth ancl lacliecl proper recnritrnent proceclures. ancl ani irrquirv \vils conclrrctccl

I

irr.lruiuiu'\'?.fi17. l-lot'evcr. thc petitioncrs clicl not pllticip0tc arrcl thcir sillan'tt'rt:i t stol)[)crl irr ]01(r tlrr'-'tu r\ccss lpl)()irrlrrrr-'nts. \irrrilltr crr.ies {('1'} \r.r lll(r 1(tl7 rlnrl l)-721,l2017) rvere previoirslv rcvicrvccl. aurl tlri.s Cou[t clirectuct [o rel'cr thrir' Lirsc Irr thc Scrrrtirtr,('orttrttitlr'c Nrr. l. llrr ('trnrrlillrt-' also tirrrncl tlrrrt rrll al)t)r)irrtruents cxceeclecl sanctionecl stre ngth aucl llckecl proper ,trlroc*dr.,rer. ['lc ;r'avc'd f.or the disrlissal of the petition.

i

I

We have heard the learrled coLu-rsel f'or the parties d piLused the record ri,i th tlrcir irsslstance.

5.Enrployees generally have no inherent ,igf',t to regularization.

I

Itegularization requires a legal or statutory'basis. .such as] a law. rulle, ol'polir:r,, llrc l)r't),-cSS tttttsI lrtlltct'c Itl tltcsc pr'{.)\ isrtirrs lrrrtl urrvcl'rrlncrrt 1;olicir's. \\tillrrlr:t strclt rt lrasis. ucltttt'itcttral etnplo)/ees clnrrcrI clirirrr regulariz{tion. ltclcrcnec irr tlri.s rcglrrl nlly lre rtracle to the cases ul tl l,

n 'e I Iot' l'l L'll Itt !-tJ!lLt-r' I :!, i/, i',

I t,,t: t t tt !'. !- y\! l t|L1UJAIU! Slyt I i t70Z I S C M I { 5 Z 7. lTcdcrut It t r, ) l'l () l)ttki.t'lurt tht'ut tHi!

,\' c L' t' c I Lt t'i',,t /ilii.lfl't' o l'Lutr unil Jtt.slit't' I.ylutntrltuil ttntl ttnolltt,t' r. l:'rt:ul-(-,\'ttlrlttt;t I uttc! tttlrarc ([]l,D 2A24 SC 515); Govcrnmcnt o.{' l{hyltart, Pnkhtttnkhsra thrrnt[fu Secrelur re cn4,0t' qnd olhel's 1,. Sher Antan lhers (2022 SCN,I lt

106); ancl Arlc.s'l;r's. Stctl Cont n Litnilecl r,. Bcrkh I .\itlcli e arul oll'te tZU I tl S("N'I It I I tt 1 )

6.l'he Act 2013 was irrtenclecl to lrcucflt all lorrg-serving contract enrplovee.s. tlru u()\rnr))t'nt hus il rc.st)()rrsitlilitr lrr lrpplr lhis luu, tiiirtv lrrr[ ct;trirllv to irll

I

r'liuiltle e tttpl()\'L'es. u ithotrl clist:r'irttirutliorr. I rrr[riasccl trrrtl rrrtrttliscritnirtrl[,rrr irttlllt'rttr.'ttIittiott is ct'rrciitl. llcltr-'ticilr] lirrts lirr r ir iI scri ltrits lrrtr.l lirlrur'*t's :iiiuuir' lrc irrplertrertterl pronrptlv nud ef]-ectivelv to avoicl clelal's hnri unrrecessal')'(lourt t

\ )l>t(=

t clrirllr'ngL's, I'irriclr inrplenrentation r.sclrrccs thc r t rrlc rr t ott the ('trtu'Iq. Itcgrrllrlizution l'c-lL,r's to ilpllointing u rpurlrli crl corrt lacl crtr;rl o\/c e to tt llet'lltilnrrllt

I

position. cl'lt'ctir,c inrntecliirtc.lt,. irs 1-lcr. tlrc S i rrclh (ltc $trlur' r za( iort ot' Adhoc & i/ L'ontr"ac( Iinrplol,ees) Act 2013. 'l'[e ,,\ct cprplrasiz_c,s Ilr rir all con LrtrcI errrpl (] \/ec:i- regarclless oI theil appointnrerit nrethocl or any pro ceclural shortconri rlgs. ilt'c I rleenrecl valiclIy appointecl and their employnjen{. cannot be challenged.

I

{ l. Ilol+'ever, at tire sanre time, it cannot Lre ignorecl that the Regulari zal.ion o ['

I

contractr,ral employees requires a tail. assessrxent ol. the employee's perlbnrarrcu lruil qualifications and thc hrlfillnreul oi'codal l'orrlaliti reqLlirecl fbr the sub.jt-ct positrt-rrrs. \\,'itlrout the.se. ernplo),1-es clnnot cIuirrr r cu.rrl rizittiorr ol'selr ice. l-h';

rr--q.

clil'lL'r'e ncc-{ hct\\'ccn it contt.actuill crrrpl ()\'cc lnrl lt t'c rrl r cntplrrvcc ltl'c nlitlrrilti r Lrolh thc erl;:1o\ree al') tltr' c'rrr;tl()\,cr lrrtl. irtter' lia. inclrrclr' a.s:- ( ut)ntnrclrnrl crrrIlo],ec is rtstrllIi crtrploretl irr lr spce illc I t'io..l ol tlrslt. rr illt rr rr'i ctttI tIitl., (ii) ('otttl'itCtLti.ll eprptolrecs.gcl.lcr.allt, clo tirit tCC ive the salt.lc lrerru.llts or statutory protection as*regular enrployees. (iii) The enrployee is engaged lor a specific project or tasl<. (iv) Trre con ual enrployee olieri lra.s 1'llol-c ilt'xitrilit;, in telprs oj'nork [otrr.s arrcl Iocatiotr. (v) A contractrral ellplo\'re I cln be Iess costly in the short term as it cloes not require lrenetlts and ot,lrer long- ternr financial cornrnitments, and (vi) Hiring regular oyees is often a long- tenl conrnritnrent. so organizations opt 1'or contractual rl<ers to-manage risks i ilsrl,r1,'irrl,-'rl rr itlr tl uctrrntirrt-r rlrrltcl clt"rrnrrtls gt fi. lt rllllr'iu's lionr the recurrl lhnl li,i,o sirlilar. ccl tiltrlionul petitiotrs ( ('l:) No.l)-j22l2tJI4 & CP No.D-9501?()l B) *,er-c Illcrl bv th pct riiorrcrs' c(i clrgrrcs II agirinst the sanle respondents. Both petitiou.s \/ere clis of. directirrs the scru{.in\i conlrittee to consider the cases ancl tlle a con] lpliance report. Crrllcrrt rl

Petitioners rvele appointecl in the same nranuer and ,,] irder the satlte tenns as ;letitioriers in the prior cases. However, petitionel s have beeu cleniecl , regularization o1' services in the populatiou Welfare DiPpartment Sindh. Their Salaries lernairr unpaicl lrecause thet, \\/er.e clecIar.ecl ,,exces is" enlployees ancl thrlse

I

tt'lto lrir"ctj tltent pt'oceeilecl uncler the Anti-corrrrptiorr larvlt. At this staqe. rve havc lrccrr irrlirlrrrc.l tlrat tlris corrr't irr cl.p No.ll- I:261201 7 arriti D- 711 t?flt"Z t-,,,r,'tl rrn tlrc reJlo't o1' thc DPWO ariiJ DAo fiho{ki ohsrr.r,eti tha t there were 2.5 cxce.ss

I

cnll)lor t:cs lrntl [1rt' l)l)w( ) lrlrl llrclrri\ st()pPctl rlre ir sltlirrit:s. lrorr ci'ur'. tlri' i

enrl)[{1,\'ces rvlro dicl not appear. bcfirlc tlre Hrrr|rrir1, Olli,1 ict' \vc!'c givctt ittrrlllr,;r' cliancc to rJo so, along with all relevant appoinl.ureul. clllcurnents. to allorry lbr lirrther investigation ancl resolution of,tlreir cases ancl the final decision was nrrcL-: to rlispcnse u'ith their service.s orr tlre nl'orcsaicl analogy. I

q. In our view, every citizen has trre inalienable ri ght to equal protectiun ol' tlre larv. i'rs guaranteed by Article 4 of the Constitutiou Pu blic otficials urr-tst acI rrilliirl tlrcil i)t)\\,cl's. Iirirlt.lirid irr !t)orl liritlr. rlsru'ipg c(lrprl tlclr(rrrcut firr.:rll fl

3t Ll

'l'his illigns tr,'itlr tlre coltstitulitttrrl prirrciplr's - ol' rrrrn-cr;:loilltiprr irs pr.pi it!,-'tl ttrttJet"A[ticle 3 of,tlre Constitutiotr ancl the state's clrrtv to secure the rvell-treing ol' its ptoPlc b,\'cl'lsttring eqtritnLrle riglrts [rr'tu,ecn cr.nplolcrs lrrrl c111:l6l,ces. r'1i.sirrg / living sltrnrlarcls. and reducing incorre. clisparill, 3s l-) rovicle'c[ rntdr-r' r\rticle 25 ol' tlte Coustitntion, which is further lbrtillecl uncler Artic e 3B of the Constituliorr (Princil;les of Policy).

I

I

t, 10. We have noted that the basic concept o1'Aclhoc arlrcl Contract appoirrtnrents t;t,'

li against the regttlar posts is a stopgap arrangement whicft is not a perprlpetrt character' In ortr view, every post is required to be nlt*A thror-rgh the pretps.l i {t l

l)l'e.\t'r'itrt'tl [rr l;.ttt'ttot otltcrlvise, Iti tltc prcscrrt clsc. thc pctitirilrers lrlc aclrlittecllr Ac[ltoc lttttl ccltttt'ltctttal ctlulo-t,qt-'s t)l'Ilrr' r'cspontlcul clepdrtrtrclrt anrl tIgs hayc 1() Vcstccl riull( firt'regttlar appoir1t1l.g1!

: . .. r a-_ "So firr fls contrnct eirl',loynrcrrt is corrcrr.rrgrl.

{}- .i+.'o

itl ottr t'ie\\'- a cotttt'act etttplovee. u'hose pcriocl ol'corrti'lrct crl;rltlvtrrcpl crpir...':.r

I

Lr) clllrrx cll'tittte. carries tto vestecl +,ight to rcurain iu cntplol,urepI alcl tSis L'oult cattlrot lorce tlre respQndetrts to regularize or extencl tlre coptract peLiocl of t5e petitioners itt writ.iurisdiction when their services werel clispensecl with in 2016 i

based on the inqtriry report; and they approachecl tllis Court ip 2021 l"5e t, i

i'esponclctrts are lequired to aclrrc'rtise thc'posts to Llc fillccl throirgfu a coptpctitiie process, rvhich is a requirement of [aw. ]

i

ll. lr is ircll-.settlccl no\\/ thirt l'cgr,rlarization of t i, e scrvires cfl' corrtutct ,dt i

e lrtPl()\ ccs is ltluitvs stttricct to tlrc li lrillrbilitr ol' pi)sis lrncl ti'illitlrrrrriI rrl rccrrritrncrrr critcril. thc llctitiuncrs lrlrvr' rrot irririlrll. trc,ln illll)piriturl r)pr.rlli, lrrrrl 'i tt'ittts;rarentl-t' through the prescrilrcri conr;:rctitivc ;r,'n*.r[ ,,, tjre ylcupcics \\,cr.c not advertisecl in the newspaper. Besicles it is well-setilecl law t[a[ a coutr.lcr ertrplol'ee is clebarrecl liorrt approachirrg this Coufi in conJtitutional .juriscliction. irr

I

thc light tlf the larv Iaicl dorvtt hy tlte Strprenrc Court oflpaltistas in t5e csses ol' i it' A l/. I tul t flr,:Will 0t1d oillffi ZA1,9 SCMR 648, .4 icr 202fi S('h'Ilt 5()7 irrrrl .l1irr ,\rrrr t'()(n lttt: lJttil t' I) t lti,Yt t rt t Itt l a t'trtt I i ttttt r L.lirlinr.y' tttttl t

o1l1e11.t 2()2() S(-h,llt 162S.

{ I

I liirt in vieu, ol' the I'ollorvrng .[urtg nrents ol' tire Su I)r'cnrc ('tlrrrt u I I'irI<isllttt. tltt't't' is tto occitsiorr lirl thc rlctiriletl ili.scir:siorr )\ Lr.s rrt Iltc qrrcstion i,l' rrrairrtainaLlility of the instant petition: Got,t,rnmcnt lluloc:hi,t't t1 l, Zu h idtr lvtktr (2005 SCMR 642\. r/. 'l-un -ttr-Rclt (PLD 2010 SC 67(,t.

l;'crlc rctlirttt o{ Paki.ytcttr r,. Ar{uhrt m tnttl Azt nt ('htltltrr (2013 scN{R r20). ,!1 lt:il ( tr Lhun t,. Gtn,er nl o lt i.t'lt ut (20 t3 scN,lti 30.t). rlul ll'uhttlt r'. !lll!.. (2013 SCN{l{ I3S3), PDO.t t,. lpL.Ll:stl_lltusi e0t3 SCMIT l7t)7). t,!,-t I' 'atl ttl ,4 , Ri:vi (2015 sc i\,1It I 5,[5), P I' :iz-ttt' llcltntrtrt ('lttttttllttl{l' (2016 SCN{ tt l4) . PDI-1,-l y irlr,y ltrut Ltt I Khun (2017 sCN,t It

\ 5rl q

20 1 0), P L4 v. Zaeern- Aziq _O_Ure.s'hi (201 I I'LC (C.S) I ) arrd Pnki,vtun Airlint: Pilots rl,ssocicttion v. PIA (2019 SCMR 278).

I 13. We nray ot:serve that the Provincial Cabinet is wqrll within its powers to f lnre polic1,. horvever, subfect to larv, It is u,ell-settll ed tlrat if a polici, is \. nranifestly inconsistent with the Constitutional comnrands, retrogressirre in nature. arrrl cliscrirt-rirrtttorl, ilrter se the poprrlace is not i,r'',,',',,,,',J fl'orn _iudicial r"evicrr .

l)r'ittrrr lircic thr clr'cision ol tlre resSlrrrclerrts hns tal<en carie of tlre lrru, rrncler tlre

I

I

i

Sinclh (ltegulalization of Ad-hoc arrtl (.outract L:rnplorc0sl r\c(. l0li. irs tlrcir"

I

lrpl)()irrtrrrcrrt is cxccsjs aplloitrtnrcrrts.

l.[. 'l'hc petitioners, in ollr vien'. l]irvc lnilecl to nrilkc ottt their cil$c lot' legularization of their sen,ice as their case is lreither covcilecl undeL Section 3 ol'' the Sinclh (Regularization of Acl-hoc ancl Contract Enrploy'l[es) Act,2Al3 nor lhlls rvitlr in tlre amtrit of Policy of Governnrent o1' Sinclh.

15.Prima lacie the_respondents misused the author ity of law ancl utrclc recrLritrneuts against the subject posts without aclopting t1he codal fornralitics as t'crlttit'etl rrttr[r:r' tltc lltrt'. Wc huve ulsu rruticcrI thirt rcsl]( rnclcnts havc fillctl tlrc

I

[)r]sts u itltout lirllou'iug tlre proceclure llt'o\ritlecl unde r tlre luu, ltrr lirlli lling strcli prrSts irrrscil ol] ope n nrerit thlorrgh l conlpetitivc tl 'ocess. -['heletorc. thc t'espotrtlcttts arc rlirected [o ensure tirirt uo srrch nl]p(]intrle rt is rtturle-irr tltc lirtrrrc tliat ural'r,iolatc the lau,settled by the Suptenre Court rega i,ting appointnrent. etc. i*

16.l'he ;retition and listed applications are disposed of rvith no order as to

I

i i

costs in tcrnrs of the direction given in paragraphs 14 and I abo\ie.

zu!,,)21

I.IEAD OF T, BENCI_IES

.l I:

\lr;rlrll rri S.rorrrrl

t