Safoorah Begum (Petitioner) VS Province of Sindh & Ors (Respondent)

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

C.P. No. D-5982 of 2025 [Gul Nawab V. Province of Sindh and others]

C.P. No. D-5983 of 2025 [Safoora Begum V. Province of Sindh and others]

Date Order with signature of Judge(s)

Before:

Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi

Date of hearing and Order: 04.03.2026

Mr. Abdul Aziz, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. Asad Ahmed, Advocate for the Respondent/KMC.

ORDER

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J. – Petitioners Gul Nawab and Safoora Begum filed the captioned Constitution Petitions under Article 199 of the Constitution, seeking release of their retirement benefits, gratuity, and pension enhancements.

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner in C.P. No. D-5982/2025 submitted that the petitioner, who served in BPS-2 in the HMD Parks and Recreation Department, TMC Malir Karachi, retired on 01.07.2024 but has not yet received his pensionary benefits.

3.Learned counsel for the Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC) responded that the petitioner’s pension case has been processed by the Welfare Department, and an amount of Rs. 2,523,618/- has been cleared. He added that the petitioner is already drawing a monthly pension from HBL, and the cleared amount will be credited to his account within one week.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner agreed that the petition may be disposed of in these terms.

5.In C.P. No. D-5983/2025, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the death of her husband on 06.09.2011, the petitioner was receiving a family pension which had not been increased.

6.Learned counsel for KMC stated that the petitioner is currently drawing Rs. 21,207.23 per month. Following her enhancement request, the Internal Audit Department has fixed her enhanced family pension at Rs. 35,355.50 per month. The arrears totaling Rs. 1,255,470/- will be credited to her account along with the enhanced pension from the upcoming month.

7.The learned counsel for the petitioner agreed that the petition may be disposed of in these terms.

8.Accordingly, without touching the merits of the case, both petitions are disposed of in accordance with the statements made by the respondent-KMC.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Ayaz Gul