Zafar Ahmed Khan & Others (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Before:

Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon CP No D- 2857 of 2022 (Zafar Ahmed Khan & others v Province of Sindh & others) CP No D- 4133 of 2023 (Zahoor Shah v Province of Sindh & others)

Date of hearing and order:- 22.5.2025

Mr. Muhammad Samiullah Soomro, advocate in CP No D- 2857 of 2022.

Muhammad Iqbal, petitioner No.4 present in person Mr. Muntazir S. Mehdi, Additional Prosecutor General petitioner No.5 in CP No D- 2857 of 2022.

Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Khaskheli holding brief for Mr. Naeem Iqbal advocate for respondent.

Mr. Ali Safdar Depar, Assistant A.G for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Along with Liaquat Ali Abro, Nadeem Ahmed Quresh, Law officer, Law Department Government of Sind.

ORDER

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J., These petitions seek the upgradation of the Additional Prosecutor General (BPS-19) post, currently held by the petitioners since 2018. As this is an isolated post with no further promotion avenues, the petitioners submitted that for upgradation until a proper service structure and promotional policy must be established. They highlighted discrimination, submitting that similar posts in other departments, such as Law Officer, Deputy District Attorney, Prosecution Inspector, Private Secretary, and Senior Private Secretary, have already been upgraded under similar circumstances.

2.These petitions, filed by Additional Prosecutors General (BPS-19) appointed since 2018, seek the upgradation of their isolated posts. Petitioners, with over ten years of legal experience, argue that despite being appointed through the Sindh Public Service Commission, the absence of a service structure or promotion policy since 2007 has resulted in their stagnation and discriminatory treatment. They highlighted that other posts within the Law Department and other government departments, such as Deputy District Attorneys, Prosecution Inspectors, and Private Secretaries, have been upgraded under similar circumstances. The petitioners contend that the Law Department has deliberately avoided addressing these issues, despite government directives to collect details of isolated posts for upgradation. They assert their right to equal treatment and protection under the Constitution, citing Articles 4, 5, 9, 18, and 25, which guarantee legal protection, obedience to law, security of person, freedom of profession, and equality before the law, respectively.

Page 1

3.The learned AAG acknowledged the petitioners' request for upgradation due to the isolated nature of their posts and the lack of a service structure. However, citing a Supreme Court judgment 2013 SCMR 1752 (Civil Review Petition No. 193/2013) that discourages upgradation without departmental restructuring, they deferred to the Administrative Department for details on service structure and promotions, requesting to be excluded from the petition.

4.Faced with this legal point, the petitioners, who are representing themselves, asked to withdraw their petitions. They stated that the department had already submitted a summary to the Chief Minister of Sindh regarding the subject matter. This request appeared reasonable and is granted. These petitions are therefore disposed of as withdrawn, without a decision on the merits of the case and with no order as to costs.

JUDGE

HEAD OF CONST. BENCHES

SHAFI

Page 2