Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLD 3231 = 2026 SHC 226
Sindh High Court
CP No.D-4027 of 2025
Presented By: Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi
Date of hearing and order:- 11.02.2026 Mr. Asif Mubarak Ali Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Abdul Jalil Zubedi, AAG a/w Mr. Raza Mian, DSP Legal-II, CPO, Karachi

(Amir Suleman

VS

Province of Sindh and others)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199,25

Summary The petitioner, a police constable, challenged his dismissal from service under a General Order dated 11.03.2024, which had already been declared void by the High Court in earlier constitutional petitions. He argued that although other police officials dismissed under the same order had been reinstated, he had been denied the same relief. The respondents contended that he was no longer a member of the police force due to his dismissal. The High Court held that once the dismissal order had been set aside, it ceased to have any legal effect, and the petitioner was entitled to be restored to his previous position. The Court further held that denying reinstatement while granting it to similarly situated officials violated the constitutional guarantee of equality. The petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits within one week. Sections Used Relief Sought Facts of the Case Petitioner's Arguments Respondents' Arguments Court's Analysis Findings Final Order Sections / Articles Used 199, 25 Two-Word Description Service Reinstatement Equality Principle           O R D E R Petitioner Amir Suleman has filed this Constitutional Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, seeking the following reliefs: To set aside the impugned order dated 11.03.2024 passed by the respondent No.2, which has already been set-aside by this Court in C.P. No. D-1480/2024 and C.P. No. D-1856/2024 vide order dated 19.03.2025; To direct the respondent No.2 to reinstate the service of the petitioner, as, after setting aside the order dated 11.03.2024 by this Court, the other aggrieved persons have already been reinstated on their respective services, hence the petitioner is also entitled to be reinstated on service. Grant such further, additional, or alternative relief, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.   The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed in the Police Department and performed his duties diligently and punctually throughout his career, which remained unblemished. He was lastly posted as a Police…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register