2764/2019 Const. P. Hafiz Muhammad Usman and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court2025

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author)

Share on WhatsApp
2764/2019 Const. P. Hafiz Muhammad Usman and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others (Respondent) Sindh High Court Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) Order Date: 22-MAY-25 It is established law that long or satisfactory service alone does not grant a right to regularization for ad-hoc or contract employees, nor can High Courts revive expired contracts or alter their terms and conditions of service (Deputy Commissioner Upper Dir v. Nusrat Begum (2022 SCMR 964), Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa v. Saeed ul Hasan (2021 SCMR 1376), Province of Punjab v. Prof. Dr. Javed Iqbal (2022 SCMR 897), Khushal Khan Khattak University v. Jabran Ali Khan) (2021 SCMR 977),. Primarily, regularization requires an executive policy or specific statute. Absent such a policy or statute, this Court lacks jurisdiction to order regularization. 6. However, this petition for the regularization of contract employees at the Lyari Development Authority (LDA) is disposed of in the terms that they were hired in 2014 for the Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Town (SMBBT) project to develop land management software, and their case needs to be remitted to the competent authority of the respondents as this decision is based on the recommendation of the Minister for Local Government, Sindh, which is in alignment with the Lyari Development Act 1993, and the Provincial Cabinet decision from March 2018, endorsing the regularization of qualified contract employees of different departments of government of Sindh. The competent authority is directed to decide on their regularization within three months after hearing the petitioners. This decision must consider their current serving status and the established legal principles regarding regularization, as discussed. The regularization issue is further supported by the SMBBT project's sponsoring agency having transitioned to the Local Government Housing Town Planning Department. 7. This petition is disposed of accordingly.
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.

Related judgments

Red Notices against Foreign National Proclaimed Offender

PLJ 2024 Karachi 138 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2024

Judgment on Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act 2012

PLJ 2023 Karachi 124 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2023

Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013 explained in a Judgment

PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 154 · Sindh High Court · 2022

Article 140- Cross Examination of a Witness

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020

Re-Examination is more important than Examination in Chief

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020