5473/2017 Const. P. Umer Ansari and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (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
5473/2017 Const. P. Umer Ansari and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent) Sindh High Court Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) Order Date: 23-APR-25 Drawing an analogy from the present situation and, more importantly, guided by the principles established by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Dr. Naveeda Tufail and 72 others v. Government of Punjab and others (2003 SCMR 291) and Shahzad Shahmir and others v Government of Sindh & others (2021 SCMR 824). The Dr. Naveeda Tufail case shows that the Federal Government regularized ad hoc employees through the Public Service Commission. While the Petitioners, as provincial contract employees, cannot automatically claim this, Article 25 of the Constitution calls for equal treatment. In Naveeda Tufail, the Supreme Court recognized a legitimate expectation of regularization for Punjab's ad hoc lecturers due to continuous ad hoc appointments. The Supreme Court directed the Punjab government to regularize them via the Punjab Public Service Commission, following the Federal model with some concessions, ensuring separate consideration from direct recruits and non-retention of unsuitable candidates. This case highlights the need for fairness and the Public Service Commission's role in regularization. However, the Supreme Court in the case of Shahzad Shahmir held that appointments to BPS-17 under Article 242 of the Constitution must be made by the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC), rendering contract appointments to such posts illegal from the outset.
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