KARACHI: SHC hears case of men sacked by culture dept
KARACHI, July 23: The Sindh High Court asked the provincial culture and tourism department on Wednesday not to fill up the vacancies caused by impugned termination of 27 of its employees till August 7 when their petition would come up for hearing.
The 27 petitioners, serving in various grades ranging from one to 15, submitted through Advocate Ghulam Mustafa Veenjhar that they applied for the posts held by them in August 2006 in response to advertisements published by the provincial government.
In all, 100 vacancies were advertised and as many candidates were finally selected and issued appointment letters in November 2007. All the 100 appointees were dismissed on June 6 by a stereotyped letter alleging that they were appointed for political considerations. Twenty-seven of them challenged their removal in the high court.
The petitioners said they were selected after written tests and interviews under the prescribed procedure. They were appointed several days before the announcement of general elections on November 19, 2007. However, the selection process was initiated much earlier. They alleged that the department wanted to accommodate favourites of the new government by rendering them jobless.
A division bench comprising Justices Mrs Qaiser Iqbal and Khwaja Naveed Ahmed issued notices to the department and other respondents for August 7 and restrained them from making fresh appointments in the meantime.
Ex-minister’s plea
The bench adjourned the hearing of former provincial minister Nadir Akmal Leghari’s petition against re-investigation of a murder charge against him after his discharge by the investigation officer to August 6 and extended its interim injunction against any coercive process against the petitioner till that date. The ex-minister is alleged to be involved in a clash resulting in the death of one person at Ghotki on the eve of the February 18 general election.
Assistant Advocate-General Adnan Karim Memon said in reply to the arguments of Advocate Iqtidar Ali Hashmi, the petitioner’s counsel, that there was no bar on re-investigation of a criminal case and it could be conducted even after submission of the charge-sheet.
Construction stayed
Justice Khalid Ali Z. Qazi, meanwhile, restrained the builder of commercial-cum-residential complexes on plots 54-C, Shahbaz Commercial Lane 4, Phase VI, Defence Housing Authority, and 20-C, Bukhari Commercial Lane, Phase VI, Defence, from raising further construction or creating third party interest in either of the two projects.
The judge also asked the SHC deputy registrar (judicial) to inspect the site on Thursday to ascertain whether the complexes were being constructed in violation of the DHA and Clifton cantonment board building regulations as alleged by two plaintiffs who have wholly or entirely booked the properties in the two projects. The deputy registrar would be assisted by a qualified engineer to examine the technical aspects of the construction work.
Appearing for plaintiffs Nasiruddin Shahab and Mrs Uzma Nasir, Advocate Nisar A. Mujahid alleged that the structures were being raised in gross violation not only of the specifications agreed to by the builder firm but also of the DHA and cantonment board rules.
PS restrained
National Industrial Relations Commission member Ghulam Nauman Shaikh, meanwhile, barred the Pakistan Steel management from taking any adverse action against Syed Rehan Mahmood, an activist of the People’s Workers Union, the collective bargaining agent of the concern, employed as a junior assistant.
The petitioner alleged that he withdrew his previous petitions from the NIRC and the high court following an assurance by the management that the impugned show cause notices issued against him would be withdrawn. However, after the withdrawal of the petitions, the management went back on its promise and re-issued the same show cause notice on July 16 requiring him to submit his explanation within seven days. The NIRC issued a notice to the management for August 13 after hearing Advocate M.A.K. Azmati for the petitioner and restrained the respondents from taking any action in pursuance of the impugned notice till that date.