| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 643 2026 SLD 643 = 2026 SHC 475 = 2026 PLC 867 |
Sindh High Court, Larkana Bench
C.P. No. D-1228 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1231 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1236 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1244 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1245 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1248 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1251 of 2025
Presented By: (Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry), (Mr. Justice Abdul Hamid Bhurgri) JUDGE
Petitioners : Waheed Ahmed & others in C.P. No. D-1228 / 2025, Shahzad Ahmed & others in C.P. No. D-1231 / 2025, Salar Khan & others in C.P. No. D-1244 / 2025 and Abid Ali & others in C.P. No. D-1245 / 2025, through Mr. Rafique Ahmed K. Abro, Advocate. Aamir Ali & another in C.P. No. D-1236 / 2025 through Mr. Abdul Rehman A. Bhutto, Advocate. Muhammad Bakhsh & others in C.P. No.D-1248/ 2025, Farukh Khalil & others in C.P. No.D-1251/ 2025, through Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, Advocate.
Respondents : Province of Sindh & others through Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, Additional Advocate General Sindh a/w Dr. Parkash Lal, Focal Person on Court matters on behalf of Secretary Health, Government of Sindh, Dr. Muhammad Qasim Director, Health Services, Larkana and Dr.Khursheed Ahmed Bhutto, Focal Person for D.H.O., Jacobabad. Date of hearing : 26-02-2026 Date of decision : 05-03-2026
C.P. No. D-1228 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1231 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1236 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1244 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1245 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1248 of 2025, C.P. No. D-1251 of 2025
Presented By: (Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry), (Mr. Justice Abdul Hamid Bhurgri) JUDGE
Petitioners : Waheed Ahmed & others in C.P. No. D-1228 / 2025, Shahzad Ahmed & others in C.P. No. D-1231 / 2025, Salar Khan & others in C.P. No. D-1244 / 2025 and Abid Ali & others in C.P. No. D-1245 / 2025, through Mr. Rafique Ahmed K. Abro, Advocate. Aamir Ali & another in C.P. No. D-1236 / 2025 through Mr. Abdul Rehman A. Bhutto, Advocate. Muhammad Bakhsh & others in C.P. No.D-1248/ 2025, Farukh Khalil & others in C.P. No.D-1251/ 2025, through Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, Advocate.
Respondents : Province of Sindh & others through Mr. Liaquat Ali Shar, Additional Advocate General Sindh a/w Dr. Parkash Lal, Focal Person on Court matters on behalf of Secretary Health, Government of Sindh, Dr. Muhammad Qasim Director, Health Services, Larkana and Dr.Khursheed Ahmed Bhutto, Focal Person for D.H.O., Jacobabad. Date of hearing : 26-02-2026 Date of decision : 05-03-2026
[Waheed Ahmed & others v. Province of Sindh & others], [Shahzad Ahmed & another v. Province of Sindh & others], [Aamir Ali & another v. Province of Sindh & others], [Salar Khan & others v. Province of Sindh & others], [Abid Ali & others v. Province of Sindh & others], [Muhammad Bakhsh & others v. Province of Sindh & others], [Farukh Khalil & others v. Province of Sindh & others]
Law: Constitution of Pakistan
Section: 199(1)(a), 189
Tag Line No reinstatement or regularization of COVID-19 contractual/daily wage employees—expiry of contract cannot be challenged through constitutional jurisdiction. Summary The Petitioners, engaged during the COVID-19 pandemic as daily wage workers (data-entry operators, nursing students, volunteers) at Corona Vaccination Centers (CVCs), sought: Reinstatement in service, and Regularization of employment after their services were terminated upon expiry on 30.06.2025. 🔹 Factual Background Petitioners were hired on Rs. 600/day for 89 days during COVID-19 emergency. Their employment was temporary and contractual, extended periodically by the Provincial Cabinet. Final extension granted till 30.06.2025. After pandemic subsided, Government decided not to extend services further. Petitioners relied on another High Court judgment granting relief to similar employees. 🔹 Key Legal Issues Whether terminated contractual employees can seek reinstatement through writ jurisdiction. Whether such employees are entitled to regularization of service. Whether expiry of contract constitutes illegal termination. 🔹 Court’s Findings 1. Regularization of Service Not maintainable: Requires continuity in service. Petitioners already stood terminated. Even otherwise: No statute or policy exists mandating regularization. Courts cannot order regularization under Article 199 without legal basis. 2. Reinstatement in Service Petitioners were: Daily wage / contractual employees. Appointed for a specific temporary purpose (COVID-19 emergency). Their employment ended due to: Expiry of contract, not dismissal. Law is settled: Courts cannot revive expired contracts. No writ lies to enforce non-statutory contractual rights. 3. Distinction Clarified Reinstatement ≠ Regularization Reinstatement must be established first. Only then can regularization be considered. 4. Earlier Judgment Distinguished Case of Mudasir Ali Bhatti (Hyderabad Bench): Held not binding precedent. Passed without considering binding Supreme Court judgments. Under Article 189, only Supreme Court decisions are binding. ORDER; Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry J. – The Health Department, Government of…