| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5267 2024 SLD 5267 2024 PLC 690 |
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Constitutional Petition No.D-900 of 2023, decided on 28th November, 2023. Date of hearing: 15th November, 2023.
Before Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro and Arbab Ali Hakro, JJ
Fidaullah Qureshi for Petitioners except petitioners Nos.2, 13 and 74. Noor Hassan Malik for Petitioners Nos.2, 13 and 74. Ali Raza Baloch, Assistant A.G. along with Inspector/P.I Muhammad Akhtar Pathan on behalf of DIGP, Sukkur and SIP Jameel on behalf of SSP, Khairpur.
Constitutional Petition No.D-900 of 2023, decided on 28th November, 2023. Date of hearing: 15th November, 2023.
Before Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro and Arbab Ali Hakro, JJ
Fidaullah Qureshi for Petitioners except petitioners Nos.2, 13 and 74. Noor Hassan Malik for Petitioners Nos.2, 13 and 74. Ali Raza Baloch, Assistant A.G. along with Inspector/P.I Muhammad Akhtar Pathan on behalf of DIGP, Sukkur and SIP Jameel on behalf of SSP, Khairpur.
JAMSHER ALI SIAL and 82 others
VERSUS
PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Home Department and 5 others
Law: Sindh Civil Servants Act, (XIV of 1973)
Section: 12
Sindh Civil Servants Act (XIV of 1973)-------S. 12---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 199 & 212---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Terms and conditions of service---Reversion to lower post---Petitioners were aggrieved of orders passed by authorities reverting them to lower posts---Validity---Civil servant appointed on a higher post or status on adhoc, temporary or officiating basis was liable to be reversed under S.12 of Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973, to his substantive post or grade without serving any notice---There were two permutations in S.12 of Sindh Civil Servants Act, 1973: fist that reversion to lower or substantive post could be made by competent authority without notice; and second that such exercise was within the terms and conditions of service---High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction declined to interfere in the matter as reversion of petitioners / civil servants fell within the terms and conditions of service---In the present case there was neither any question of non-hearing of petitioners, nor of not providing them opportunity of hearing before passing orders in question, and nor the question of discrimination---High Court did not have jurisdiction under Art. 199 of the Constitution, as the matter squarely fell within the jurisdiction of Sindh Service Tribunal---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.Nazeer Ahmed Chkrani v. Government of Pakistan 2004 SCMR 623; Gul Hassan Jatoi and others v. Faqeer Muhammad Jatoi and others 2016 SCMR 1244; 2015 SCMR 456; 2016 SCMR 1254; 2021 SCMR 1390; 2007 SCMR 54; PLD 2001 SC 1032; 1999 PLC (C.S.) 230; 2009 PLC (C.S.) 539 and 2009 PLC (C.S.) 568 ref.Khalilullah Karar and others v. PPO, Balochistan and others 2021 SCMR 1168 rel.ORDERMUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO, J.----Petitioners were appointed in Sindh Reserve Police (SRP) as police constables. By afflux of time plus on promotion with the approval of Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), they reached the rank of Sub-Inspectors and were performing their duties at different police stations, when impugned order dated 12.05.2023 was issued by respondent No.3/DIGP, Sukkur Range. This order connotes the guidelines…
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