1422/2023 Const. P. Asad Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author)
Order Date: 07-MAY-26
Insofar as the contention that Respondent No. 4???s initial appointment in 1992 was unlawful for lack of recommendation by the Sindh Public Service Commission is concerned, the same is manifestly barred by delay and laches, the petitioner having failed to furnish any plausible explanation for not assailing such appointment within a reasonable period; the respondent, having rendered service for several decades and undergone subsequent service-related developments, cannot now be unsettled in the absence of a timely challenge and complete foundational facts relating to the office presently held, and thus no writ of quo warranto is maintainable on this ground; furthermore, the petitioners have failed to place sufficient material on record to demonstrate that the private respondents are presently holding public offices without lawful authority, as mere allegations regarding entry into Voluntary Return arrangements are inadequate, particularly when the law applicable at the relevant time did not entail automatic disqualification and where, in certain instances, departmental proceedings were duly conducted; consequently, it is held that the petitions, insofar as they seek adjudication of transfers, postings, promotions, departmental penalties, service benefits and pensionary consequences, are not maintainable under the prevailing constitutional and statutory framework governing service matters, that a writ of quo warranto cannot be issued on generalized and omnibus allegations without establishing, in respect of each individual office holder, a present lack of lawful authority, that Voluntary Return under Section 25(a) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (as it stood prior to the 2022 amendment) did not amount to conviction or statutory disqualification under Section 15, that the 2022 amendment cannot be applied retrospectively to impose penal or disqualifying consequences upon concluded Voluntary Return arrangements, that departmental proceedings already conducted and penalties imposed by competent authorities cannot be reopened in quo warranto jurisdiction, and that the petitions are further vitiated, where applicable, by delay, laches, lack of bona fides and repetitive litigation on substantially identical grounds; accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, all listed constitutional petitions along with pending applications stand dismissed, with no order as to costs.Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.