| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 160 2014 SLD 160 2014 SCMR 1149 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Review Petitions Nos.17-K, 18-K and 19-K of 2012, decision dated: 7-02-2014, hearing DATE : 2-01-2014 (For review of the judgment dated 14-6-2012 of this Court passed in Civil Petition No.769-K of 2011)
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, GULZAR AHMED AND MUHAMMAD ATHER SAEED, JJ
Yawar Farooqi, Advocate Supreme Court and Mazhar Ali B. Chohan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.R.Ps. Nos.17-K and 18-K of 2012). Ansari Abdul Latif, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and A.S.K. Ghori, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.R.P. No
Civil Review Petitions Nos.17-K, 18-K and 19-K of 2012, decision dated: 7-02-2014, hearing DATE : 2-01-2014 (For review of the judgment dated 14-6-2012 of this Court passed in Civil Petition No.769-K of 2011)
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, GULZAR AHMED AND MUHAMMAD ATHER SAEED, JJ
Yawar Farooqi, Advocate Supreme Court and Mazhar Ali B. Chohan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.R.Ps. Nos.17-K and 18-K of 2012). Ansari Abdul Latif, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and A.S.K. Ghori, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.R.P. No
AKHTAR GHORI and others
VS
PROVINCE OF SINDH and others
Law: Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, (XIX of 1994)
Section: 3
Law: Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, (XIX of 1994)
Section: 3
Law: Sindh Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1990
Section: 5
Sindh Civil Service (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act (XIX of 1994)--- ----S. 3---Sindh Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1990, R.5---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 188---Review of Supreme Court ---Regularization of ad hoc appointments---Determination---Review petitioners claimed that they were initially regularly appointed in year, 1991, whereas respondents were appointed in year, 1992---Validity---Finding and observation of Supreme Court in its under review should not have been given without examining notifications of appointments of review petitioners issued in year, 1991 and relevant provisions of Sindh Civil Service (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, 1994---To arrive at valid conclusion that appointment order of year, 1991, could not be considered ad hoc appointments of respondents were regularized in year, 1994---Procedure prescribed in Sindh Civil Service (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, 1994, also led to the conclusion that a procedure was prescribed therein for regularization of ad hoc employees which had to be followed and only thereafter ad hoc employees could be regularized---No such procedure was followed in cases of review petitioners to regularize their service and, therefore, assumption was that competent authority might have considered them to be regular employees from year, 1991---Supreme Court recalled its earlier and fixed main petition for rehearing---Review petition was allowed. Dr. Azim-ur-Rehman Khan Meo v. Government of Sindh and another 2004 SCMR 1299; Ajmal Hassan Khan and another v. Government of Sindh and others 2012 SCMR 860; Nazeer Ahmed Dhoon v. Government of Sindh and others 1996 SCMR 1547; Munawar Khan v. Niaz Muhammad and 7 others 1993 SCMR 1287; Syed Saghir Ahmad Naqvi v. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary, S&GAD, Karachi and another 1996 SCMR 1165 and Mushtaq Ahmad Mohal and others v. The Honourable Lahore High Court, Lahore and others 1997 SCMR 1043 ref. ORDER MUHAMMAD ATHER SAEED, J.---These review petitions have been filed seeking review of the judgment of this Court dated 14-6-2010 in C.P.L.A. No.769-K of 2011 whereby this Court had allowed the petition filed by the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492