Law: Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments) Act, (XIX of 1994)

Section: 3(1)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 25(1),27(1)

Sindh Civil Servants (Regularization of Adhoc Appointment) Act, 1994 (XIX of 1994)-- ----S. 3(1)--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Arts. 25(1) 27(1)--Adhoc appointment--Unjustified, illegal and unconstitutional benefit to appellants--Seniority--Filing of writ petitions for regularization--Dismissed--Appeals before tribunal--Allowed--Scope and applicability of Act, 1994--Seniority of respondents was adversely effected by certain notifications--Constitution was prohibited discrimination--Challenge to--Amendment in Act, 1994--Private respondents filed appeals before Tribunal as their seniority had been adversely affected by certain notifications issued under 2014 Act benefit of which was extended to appellants; these appeals were allowed--Appellants came through proverbial back door and were saved by 1994 Act--Having secured their employment by 1994 Act an unjustified, illegal and unconstitutional benefit was sought to be extended to them through said notifications and 2014 Act--Incidentally, reasons to enact 2014 Act are neither given therein nor provided by appellants--Article 25(1) proscribes discrimination and Article 27(1) of Constitution prohibits discrimination in service of Pakistan--Appeals dismissed.     [P. 88 90] A B 2021 SCMR 116 ref. PLD 2006 SC 602. ORDER Qazi Faez Isa, J.--These ten Civil Appeals assail the common judgment dated 11 February 2021 of the Sindh Service Tribunal, Karachi (‘the Tribunal’). Five appeals have been filed by Mr. Mushtaque Ahmed Memon and five appeals have been filed by Mr. Ali Akbar Abro. The learned counsel for the respondent, law officers and officers of the Sindh Government have come from Karachi, undoubtedly at considerable expense. The learned counsel representing Mr. Ali Akbar Abro has filed an application seeking adjournment, on the ground that he had made some commitment in the city of Lahore. In order dated 28 April 2022 it was recorded, ‘that no further request for adjournment will be entertained from the appellants’ side’, yet another adjournment is sought. The reason mentioned in the adjournment application also does not justify adjourning these appeals. The learned counsel could have elected to address…

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