👋 Welcome, visitor from Columbus, US!

Labour & Service

183 judgments — showing 101-183

📝 Case Highlights on this topic

Balochistan Engineering Works Limited V. Jalal Khan,Said Akbar  V.  Gateron (Industries) Limited,Rab Nawaz and others V. Govt. of Balochistan through Chief Secretary and 3 others,See all Case Highlights →

3100/2021 Const. P. Muhammad Nusrat and Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

The Supreme Court in the case of Nazeer Ahmed Chkrani v Government of Pakistan (2004 SCMR 623), reiterating the principle from Pakistan International Airlines v Nasir Jamal Malik (2001 SCMR 934), established that a promo

5497/2019 Const. P. Manzoor Ahmed Jokhio (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

The provided rule and Supreme Court precedents establish a civil servant's entitlement to pro-forma promotion. The Supreme Court in Secretary Schools of Education v. Rana Arshad Khan (2012 SCMR 126) granted proforma prom

1662/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Nawaz Soomro (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2021

disposed of in the terms of paragraph 35(iii) of the judgment dated 18.03.2016 passed by learned Sindh Service Tribunal maintained by the Honorable Supreme Court vide order dated 26.03.2018 passed in Civil Petition No.26

4745/2024 Const. P. Tufail Ahmed Soomro (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Another (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

The Supreme Court's judgment, being in rem, applies to all and can be referenced even if the petitioner was not directly involved in the case. However, the Sindh government incorrectly repatriated the petitioner to a non

257/2025 Const. P. Zulfiqar Ali Kariro (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

It is well settled that disciplinary proceedings fall within the ambit of expression terms and condition of service of a civil servant, therefore, the jurisdiction of all other courts is barred by the provision of Sindh

8499/2017 Const. P. Haris Hamid (Petitioner) V/S Port Qasim Authority and Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

It is well settled that disciplinary proceedings fall within the ambit of expression terms and condition of service of a civil servant, therefore, the jurisdiction of all other courts is barred by the provision of Sindh

1578/2021 Const. P. Muhammad Saqib (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2021

departmental proceedings initiated against him as contemplated under Section 3(b)(c) of the Efficiency and Discipline Rules, 1988--as to how this petition is maintainable against departmental proceedings initiated agains

519/2014 Suit Ali Ahmed Lund (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & ors (Defendant)

Sindh High Court · 2014

"Civil Servants (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973--- ----R. 12-A---Correction of date of birth in service record---Scope---Contention of plaintiff was that his date of birth was 2-4-1956 instead of 2-4-19

1344/2024 Const. P. Altaf Hussain Awan (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Coming to the main case, the concept of Proforma Promotion is to remedy the loss sustained by an employee / civil servant on account of denial of promotion upon his/her legitimate turn due to any reason but not a fault o

1769/2021 Const. P. Muhammad Mazhar Khan and Othes (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

From the above discussion, it is quite clear that a person may be in the service of the Federation/province but for that reason, he cannot be classed as a 'Civil Servant' as defined in the Civil Servants Act 1973, except

279/2018 Const. P. Jawaid Akhtar (Petitioner) V/S S.L.A.T & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

While the Sindh Labour Court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the petitioners grievance, at the same time, as per the law in force at the material time, the petitioner could have sought his remedy in writ jurisdiction.

1351/2022 Const. P. Novex Dry Cleaners Hyd (Petitioner) V/S learned Sindh Labour Court Hyderbad & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2022

Since the discretion was exercised by the Tribunal in condoning the delay within frame of SIRA Act 2013, we cannot replace our discretion with that of the Tribunal as this petition is neither statutory nor efficacious re

1612/2022 Const. P. Ghulam Shabbir and Others (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2022

Petition of a civil servant in respect of his posting; not maintainable, whereas, pursuant to Section 10 of the Civil Servant Act, 1973, a Civil Servant cannot claim any specific posting or assignment while discharging h

149/2013 Const. P. National Refinery Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Mst.Farida Begum & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2017

Once an application under order I rule 10 CPC was filed, respondent No.3/Commissioner assumes the jurisdiction to pass order under the law. Any order that transgresses its authority and jurisdiction is then to be tested

2341/2010 Const. P. Muhammad Anwer (Petitioner) V/S The federation of Pakistan & Ors. (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

Basically, the matter pertains to minor penalties which were imposed on the petitioners under the Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance, 2000, (now repealed), they challenged their reduction into lower grade in

616/2020 Const. P. M/s K-Electric Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Raees Khan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

private respondents were in the employment of the petitioner / K-Electric Limited since years together in their different capacities/posts and obtained ad-interim order dated 05.10.2011 from the National Industrial Relat

1862/2021 Const. P. Rao Muhammad Azeem (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2021

disciplinary proceedings initiated against him by the respondent-Police Department--Rule 3(a) (b) of the Sindh Police (Efficiency & Discipline) Rule, 1988--disciplinary proceedings initiated against him which falls withi

6275/2020 Const. P. Noor Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S D.J South Khi (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

ACR--Admittedly, the Petitioner is a Civil Servant and his case falls within the ambit of the Sindh Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal which has the exclusive jurisdiction in respect of matters relating to the terms

615/2020 Const. P. M/s K-Electric Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Aslam Shah and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

private respondents were in the employment of the petitioner / K-Electric Limited since years together in their different capacities/posts and obtained ad-interim order dated 05.10.2011 from the National Industrial Relat

4906/2020 Const. P. M/s Sakina Export International Ltd (Petitioner) V/S M. Shair Afzal Khan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

The main ground agitated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents were not their employees but the employees of third party contractors. This plea is not tenable in the light of judgment rendered by

797/2023 Const. P. Mrs. Fouzia Basharat Samo (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Reliance can be placed on the cases of Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, Lahore, and others v. Ms. Shamim Usman, 2021 SCMR 1390; Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Establishment, Islamabad v. M.Y. Labib-ur-Re

4003/2019 Const. P. Munaza Yasmeen and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Learned / Hon (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2021

the petitioners have assailed the findings of the learned Single Bench of National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC), Karachi whereby their Grievance Petitions were dismissed with direction to the respondent-Pakista

848/2021 Const. P. M/s Gerry (Petitioner) V/S NIRC & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2021

M/s. Gerry's Dnata (Pvt.) Ltd.--Adverting to the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner-company that the NIRC was not competent to summon the Vice President for his appearance in Court, prima facie this

288/2024 Const. P. Engro Fertilizers Limited through Asad Shakil Khan (Petitioner) V/S Full Bench of NIRC & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Touching on the second issue of non-service of grievance notice. Under Section 33 of the Industrial Relations Ac1,2012 (lRA 2012), ifa grievance notice is not served, the grievance petition can be dismissed. This is beca

1832/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Fakhar ul Hasnain (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

It is well established now that the provision for proforma promotion is not alien or unfamiliar to the civil servant service structure but it is already embedded in Fundamental Rule 17, wherein it is lucidly enumerated t

296/2025 Const. P. Ahmed Raza (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Generally, civil servants have limited avenues to challenge transfers. The appropriate forum for challenging a transfer order is the Service Tribunal. This is because transfer orders are typically considered within the a

648/2021 Const. P. Asif Ali Unar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2021

seeking direction to the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh, for transferring Chairman and Controller of Examination, Sindh Public Service Commission--Since the issue is confined to the transfer and posting of responde

256/2025 Const. P. Hafeezullah (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

It is well-settled that the civil servants must first pursue internal appeals within 90 days. If the appeal is not decided within that timeframe, he/she can then approach the service tribunal to challenge the original or

3496/2022 Const. P. Zulfiqar Ali Memon and Others (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

The Supreme Court in the recent judgment, The Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary & others Vs Ghulam Shabbir and others, passed in (Civil Appeals Nos.52-K to 71-K of 2022) vide judgment dated 30.12.2025 has observ

2667/2024 Const. P. State Bank of Pakistan (Petitioner) V/S Full Bench NIRC and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

The contention that respondent No.4 was merely an employee of a third-party contractor is erroneous, as discussed supra. The Supreme Court in cases such as Fauji Fertilizer Company vs NIRC (2014 PLC (Labour) 10), SSGCL c

3376/2021 Const. P. Ghulam Mustafa Supro (Petitioner) V/S NBP and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

In view of the above discussion, the petition is maintainable. The Respondents??? actions restricting pensionary and provident fund benefits to 9 years are illegal, arbitrary, and without lawful authority. The Federal Se

827/2024 Const. P. Mehboob Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of sindh & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

The right to life, as guaranteed by Article 9 of the Constitution, extends to the right to livelihood. This means that the petitioner has the right to earn a living. However, a respondent department can terminate the ser

2671/2016 Const. P. Rizwan Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

1346/2024 Const. P. Mumtaz Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

We find that it has not been disputed that working papers were prepared by the respondent- Department about the promotion of the petitioners in BPS-19 much before their retirement, but the matter was delayed without any

617/2020 Const. P. M/s K-Electric Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Boota and Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

private respondents were in the employment of the petitioner / K-Electric Limited since years together in their different capacities/posts and obtained ad-interim order dated 05.10.2011 from the National Industrial Relat

1781/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Moazam (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

2041/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Arsalan and others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

1860/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Hayat (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

4905/2020 Const. P. M/ Sakina Export International Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fayyaz Muhammad and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

The main ground agitated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents were not their employees but the employees of third party contractors. This plea is not tenable in the light of judgment rendered by

4907/2020 Const. P. M/s Sakina Export International Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fareed and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2020

The main ground agitated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents were not their employees but the employees of third party contractors. This plea is not tenable in the light of judgment rendered by

3274/2017 Const. P. Asif Ali Shah (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

3300/2017 Const. P. Jamshed Qayoom (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

2084/2019 Const. P. Khair Muhammad (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

3275/2017 Const. P. Asif Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

1724/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Idrees Adil and others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

2065/2019 Const. P. Mashooq Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

2063/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Achar (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

179/2024 Const. P. K-Electric Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

Jurisdiction of ombudsman in respect of Service Matters

2833/2018 Const. P. Ali Raza (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2019

Learned counsel for the Petitioners while laying emphasis on Rule10- A & 11-A of Sindh Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer Rules, 1974) argued that the Petitioners are entitled to be appointed on son quot

1333/2025 Const. P. Muhammad Anjum (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

5. The Supreme Court in the recent judgment in the case of Sakhib Zar vs. M/s K-Electric Limited & others ( 2024 SCMR 1722) has held that even 10 days??? absence without leave is quantified as misconduct and on proving t

821/2023 Const. P. Muhammad Shoaib & Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Since the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Muhammad Nazir, 1998 SCMR 1081, held that the employees of Pakistan Rangers fell within the definition of a civil servant, as their case falls

289/2024 Const. P. Engro Fertilizers Limited through Asad Shakil Khan (Petitioner) V/S Full Bench of NIRC & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Touching on the second issue of non-service of grievance notice. Under Section 33 of the Industrial Relations Ac1,2012 (lRA 2012), ifa grievance notice is not served, the grievance petition can be dismissed. This is beca

183/2022 Const. P. Saddam Hussain Khoso (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

In the case of Muhammad Israrullah Vs Assistant Director, Manpower and others (2005 SCMR 716), the Supreme Court has held that the services of a deputationist could not be terminated as he retains his lien in the parent

6129/2025 Const. P. Janib (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

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 lach

1063/2025 Const. P. Mudasar Jilani (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Given the presented facts and circumstances, the Court concludes that the Petitioner has not established sufficient grounds for intervention. Consequently, the petition and any related applications are dismissed. The Pet

5014/2023 Const. P. Abdul Hameed & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

This review must consider the petitioner's eligibility, the availability of a vacancy, and all other relevant rules. The authority must also adhere to the law established by the Supreme Court in the Maula Bux Shaikh case

285/2021 Const. P. Abdul Hafeez Indhar (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

1105/2025 Const. P. Sohail Ahmed Soomro (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

Civil Servant - Deputation - Repatriation to parent department upon completion of deputation period - Request for extension not a matter of right - Borrowing department within lawful authority to repatriate deputaonist

4676/2022 Const. P. Dr. Muhammad Ilyas Laghari (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

In conclusion, a retired civil servant can be entitled to a pro forma promotion under the law, but only if he/she can establish that he/she was denied the promotion during their service due to an administrative lapse an

331/2021 Const. P. Hassnain Ali Mangi (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

1037/2022 Const. P. Abdul Razzaque Hakro (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

1107/2022 Const. P. Aqeel Hyder Junejo (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

44/2022 Const. P. Mustaqeem (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

218/2022 Const. P. Manzoor Ahmed Maitlo (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

618/2021 Const. P. Rabail Ahmed Jatoi (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

1784/2021 Const. P. Asif Ali (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

701/2022 Const. P. Rashid Ali Soomro (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2024

A perusal of the rule, which reflects that in the eventuality of the death of a civil servant during service, it empowered the appointing authority to appoint one of the children of such deceased civil servant in any of

1345/2024 Const. P. Muhammad Juman (Petitioner) V/S Govt of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

We find that it has not been disputed that working papers were prepared by the respondent- Department about the promotion of the petitioners in BPS-19 much before their retirement, but the matter was delayed without any

4611/2025 Const. P. Masroor Ali Memon (Petitioner) V/S Federation of Pakistan & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

In light of the above legal position, the repeated supersession of the petitioner, despite judicial directions and absence of subsisting legal impediment, is arbitrary, mala fide in law, and violative of settled principl

4898/2022 Const. P. Hafeez Ullah (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

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 lach

1422/2023 Const. P. Asad Hussain (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

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 lach

1139/2025 Const. P. M/s Faisal Corp (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Yousuf (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

The Petitioner???s contentions are unsustainable. The Respondents were permanent employees; voluntary abandonment is unproven, and termination without due process was illegal. The Labour Court and Appellate Tribunal prop

7742/2022 Const. P. Bilal Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S I.G of Police Sindh & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2025

In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of , directing the petitioner to seek a remedy before the Sindh Service Tribunal. This court notes that the petitioner has been pursuing the wrong legal channel since 2

2668/2024 Const. P. SBP Banking Services Corp (Petitioner) V/S Full Bench NIRC and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

The contention that respondent No.4 was merely an employee of a third-party contractor is erroneous, as discussed supra. The Supreme Court in cases such as Fauji Fertilizer Company vs NIRC (2014 PLC (Labour) 10), SSGCL c

1404/2018 Const. P. Abdul Waheed (Petitioner) V/S M/s Movenpick Hotel KHI & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

The authorities relied upon by the respondent are distinguishable on the facts. Those cases relate to situations where delay was unexplained, proceedings were not pursued bona fide, or dismissal orders were duly communic

1621/2025 Const. P. K-Electric Ltd (Petitioner) V/S NIRC and Another (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

In the present case, while issuance of a charge sheet per se does not constitute unfair labour practice, the allegation of procedural impropriety and victimization if specifically pleaded and proved could bring the matte

797/2026 Const. P. Syed Javeed Shah (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

Since the respondents themselves admit the petitioner???s entitlement and submit that his pension case has already been finalized, no justifiable reason remains for withholding the remaining retirement benefits, particul

1552/2026 Const. P. Danish Saeed (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

In view of the above position, without touching the merits of the case and with consent of the parties, this petition is disposed of along with pending application(s) with the direction that the respondent department to

1140/2025 Const. P. M/s Faisal Corp (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Aftab (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

The Petitioner???s contentions are unsustainable. The Respondents were permanent employees; voluntary abandonment is unproven, and termination without due process was illegal. The Labour Court and Appellate Tribunal prop

1747/2018 Const. P. Movenpick Hotek Karachi (Petitioner) V/S S.L.A.T & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

The authorities relied upon by the respondent are distinguishable on the facts. Those cases relate to situations where delay was unexplained, proceedings were not pursued bona fide, or dismissal orders were duly communic

754/2012 Const. P. Syed Zahoor Hussain Zaidi (Petitioner) V/S Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No.V, Karachi and others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2012

754/2012 Const. P. Syed Zahoor Hussain Zaidi (Petitioner) V/S Presiding Officer, Sindh Labour Court No.V, Karachi and others (Respondent)

1413/2025 Const. P. Muhammad Sadiq (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and Others (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

In view of the foregoing, this Court is of the considered view the petitioner???s grievance primarily relates to the processing of his revised pension case, which requires formal forwarding by the Education Department t

988/2022 Const. P. Shumaila D/o Rafiq (Petitioner) V/S The SIndh Labour Court No. V, Karachi and Another (Respondent)

Sindh High Court · 2026

988/2022 Const. P. Shumaila D/o Rafiq (Petitioner) V/S The SIndh Labour Court No. V, Karachi and Another (Respondent)