1) 3/2019 Criminal Appeal Sadhu (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 11-OCT-19


2) 7/2019 Criminal Appeal Sht.Gudi (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 11-OCT-19


3) 129/2014 Criminal Appeal Ghulam Ali (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 11-OCT-19


4) 289/2018 Criminal Appeal Chetan (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 11-OCT-19


5) 2270/2018 Suit Mir Muhammad Raza (Plaintiff) V/S Federation of Pakistan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Injunction refused in fake degree case
Matter:SUIT FOR DECLERATION
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 10-OCT-19


6) 5/2010 Conf.Case Jalaluddin (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 10-OCT-19


7) 19/2014 Conf.Case Wazeer Ali (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 10-OCT-19


8) 61/2010 Criminal Appeal Jalaluddin (Appellant) V/S The state (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 10-OCT-19


9) 1276/2017 Const. P. Mohammad Farooq (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Naseem & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 10-OCT-19


10) 2303/2019 Const. P. Mst. Sitara (Petitioner) V/S FED Of Pakistan & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 08-OCT-19


11) 2343/2019 Const. P. Arbab & another (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 08-OCT-19


12) 1641/2012 Suit SUI SOUTHERN GAS CO. LTD. (Plaintiff) V/S K.E.S.C LTD. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:Attachment before Judgment
Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT / DAMAGES
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 07-OCT-19


13) 21/2014 Conf.Case Muhammad Sharif (Appellant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 07-OCT-19


14) 87/2014 Criminal Appeal Muhammad Sharif (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 07-OCT-19


15) 2134/2019 Const. P. Sadam Hussain (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 07-OCT-19


16) 3315/2016 Const. P. Abdul Hameed & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 07-OCT-19


17) 88/2017 I. A Mohammad Shahid Murtaza (Appellant) V/S Warid Telcom Pvt Ltd. & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 04-OCT-19


18) 7988/2018 Const. P. Nadeem Mumtaz Baig (Petitioner) V/S Sindh Food Authority and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:DIRECTION
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Agha Faisal
Order Date: 04-OCT-19


19) 695/2019 Cr.Bail Ahmed Pitafi (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 04-OCT-19


20) 868/2019 Const. P. Muzammil Mumtaz Meo (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Legislation on manufacture sale and use of gutka, mainpuri and mawa etc
Matter:SECURITY
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi
Order Date: 03-OCT-19


21) 40/2001 Civil Revision Shamsuddin and others (Applicant) V/S Abdul Jabbar & another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 03-OCT-19


22) 165/2010 Cr.J.A Muhammad Ibrahim & Others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 03-OCT-19


23) 1/2019 Adm. Suit M/S. COMMERCIAL BANK INT (Plaintiff) V/S M.V. MISKI AN OTHER (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
There cannot be two decisions with regard to same loan transaction / finance facility; that is, one passed in the foreign jurisdiction as above and the other one in the present proceeding. the Judgment given by the Court of Sharjah (UAE) in the Case filed by present Plaintiff against Defendant No.2, can be executed through the present proceeding. Therefore, the Judgment of Sharjah Court in a sum of AED 5723557 (Five Million Seven Hundred Twenty Three Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Seven Dirhams) together with 5% (five percent) of the legal interest, can be executed through the present proceeding.
Topic: Admiralty (Ship arrested )
Tag Line:There cannot be two decisions with regard to same loan transaction / finance facility; that is, one passed in the foreign jurisdiction as above and the other one in the present proceeding. the Judgment given by the Court of Sharjah (UAE) in the Case filed by present Plaintiff against Defendant No.2, can be executed through the present proceeding. Therefore, the Judgment of Sharjah Court in a sum of AED 5723557 (Five Million Seven Hundred Twenty Three Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Seven Dirhams) together with 5% (five percent) of the legal interest, can be executed through the present proceeding.
Matter:RECOVERY OF AMOUNT
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 02-OCT-19


24) 168/2019 Criminal Appeal Hussain (Appellant) V/S THe State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 02-OCT-19


25) 451/2016 Const. P. Ghulam Ali (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Topic: Peasants Rights (Sindh Tenancy Act 1950) (Peasants Rights (Sindh Tenancy Act 1950))
Advocates:Muhammad Suleman Dahri(),Mr. Jawad Ali Saahar(),Mr. Allah Bachayo Soomro, Addl. A.G. Sindh(),Mr Ali Ahmed Palh(),Mr. Abdul Sattar Sarki, Advocate(),Mr Jhamat Jethanand(14)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Order Date: 01-OCT-19


26) 1154/2018 Cr.Bail saleem (Applicant) V/S THe State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 01-OCT-19


27) 2262/2019 Const. P. ahmed (Petitioner) V/S PO sIndh (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 01-OCT-19


28) 17/2015 Conf.Case Mukhtiar Ali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 30-SEP-19


29) 845/2016 Suit Ashraf Hussain Khan. (Plaintiff) V/S Abdul Rehman Khan & Others. (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Cases involving rights of inheritence are at higher pedestal, inter alia, in view of the Sharia Act, 1991.
Topic: Administration Suits ()
Tag Line:Cases involving rights of inheritence are at higher pedestal, inter alia, in view of the Sharia Act, 1991.
Matter:LETTER OF ADMINISTRATION
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 30-SEP-19


30) 76/2016 Cr.J.A Mukhtiar Ali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 30-SEP-19


31) 106/2015 Cr.J.A Mukhtiar Ali (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 30-SEP-19


32) 609/2010 Const. P. Mir Muhammad & Others (Petitioner) V/S Province Of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 30-SEP-19


33) 3247/2017 Const. P. Nazir Hussain & another (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 30-SEP-19


34) 704/2019 Suit Pakistan Airline Pilots Association (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan International Airlines & another (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for Rejection of Plaint
Topic: merger ()
Tag Line:Application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was filed by Defendant on the ground that the Suit was barred in terms of Order II Rule2, as earlier another Suit in respect of the same cause action i.e. the Working Agreement between Plaintiff No.1 and Defendant No.1 was filed, wherein, the prayers sought in this Suit were left out; hence, the same cannot be claimed in this Suit. Such argument was repelled by the Court and it has been observed that the bar contained under Order II Rule 2 CPC would not apply, as firstly, the cause of action is not the same, though the question of interpreting the Working Agreement may be; and secondly, the parties to this Suit are not the parties in the earlier Suit, including the Plaintiffs No.2 to 5 who have also come before the Court with their individual grievance, as well as Defendant No.2, the Federation of Pakistan, who owns majority shareholding in Defendant No.1, PIA. It has been further held that in fact, this is a case of a recurring cause insofar as the implementation of the Working Agreement is concerned. Accordingly, the listed application merits dismissal, and it is so ordered.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 27-SEP-19


35) 279/2018 Criminal Appeal Mureed (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 27-SEP-19


36) 2912/2016 Const. P. Zafar Akbar (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
PTV---since the representation of the petitioner has already been decided and prima-facie there is findings against him and the said findings are not impugned before this court, thus cannot be dilated upon. In view of such state of affairs, we without touching the merits of the case on the issue of his promotion in the next Rank, hold that, basically the purpose of filling of this lis is over, thus cannot be stretched further, on the premise that once the Respondent-Pakistan Television Corporation has decided the representation of the Petitioner which provides him fresh cause of action if he at all feels himself aggrieved of such order on his representation, he can file fresh petition if he is so advised, subject to all just exceptions. Disposed of.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


37) 8184/2017 Const. P. Adeel Khan (Petitioner) V/S S.L.A.T and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
we do not concur with findings of the learned Appellate Tribunal, Sindh, as the private respondents/workers were inducted in service without completing the codal formalities and entire evidence supports the case/contention of the KPT.
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


38) 8185/2017 Const. P. Abdul Basit (Petitioner) V/S S.L.A.T and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


39) 8186/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Kashif (Petitioner) V/S S.L.A.T and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


40) 8267/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Tariq (Petitioner) V/S S.L.A.T and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


41) 8578/2017 Const. P. The Trustees of Port of Karachi and ors (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Tariq and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


42) 8579/2017 Const. P. The Trustees of Port of Karachi and ors (Petitioner) V/S Abdul Basit and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


43) 8580/2017 Const. P. The Trustees of Port of Karachi and ors (Petitioner) V/S Muhammad Wasif and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


44) 8581/2017 Const. P. The Trustees of Port of Karachi and ors (Petitioner) V/S Adeel Khan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


45) 3816/2011 Const. P. Niaz Hussain & Ors (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Therefore, the review application merits dismissal, which is accordingly dismissed as, in our view, the judgment dated 06.09.2019 passed by this court was based on correct factual as well as legal position of the case and we do not find any inherent flaw floating on the surface of the record requiring our interference.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


46) 18/2009 Conf.Case Ghulam Rasool (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


47) 51/2009 Criminal Appeal Ghulam Rasool (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


48) 69/2009 Criminal Appeal Rabdino alias Raboo (Appellant) V/S State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


49) 347/2011 Cr.J.A Meeral Mangrio (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro
Order Date: 26-SEP-19


50) 521/2017 Const. P. Muzzafar Ali (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Review--The grounds taken by the Petitioner in the review application were considered at the time of hearing of main petition and the request of the Petitioner regarding the factum of non-statutory rules of service of the Respondent-corporation, which is basically a non-statutory Corporation and claiming that Respondent-corporation has statutory rules of service is not the correct legal position of the case for the simple reason that merely publishing the service rules of a non-statutory body in the official gazette does not make the rules statutory ipso facto which even otherwise requires approval of the Government-- We are not in agreement with the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner for the simple reason that this Court considered the aforesaid submissions of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner at paragraph Nos.16 to 18 and gave finding on the issue which he is now raising in the Review Application.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 25-SEP-19


51) 5924/2017 Const. P. M/s Baluchistan Wheel Ltd (Petitioner) V/S Registrar of Industries - wise Trade NIRC & Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
To appreciate the aforesaid proposition, reference is made to Article 199(1) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, reproduced as under: - ???A High Court may if it is satisfied that no other adequate remedy is provided by law:- (a) on the application of any aggrieved party make an order??? (i) Directing??????. (ii) Declaring??????..??? 9. The above referred Article lays condition of satisfaction of this Court as to absence of any adequate remedy available under the law to the person/party invoking constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, Petitioner-establishment besides being aggrieved should have locus standi to approach this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. We have noticed that the certificate of registration issued by the Respondent No.1 is still in existence. The objection, which has now been raised by the petitioner-establishment, through the instant writ petition on the aforesaid pleas can hardly been looked into by this Court in presence of remedy provided to the Petitioner-Establishment under section 12 of Industrial Relations Act. Besides that the learned Counsel could not advance any convincing reason to establish that the Petitioner-establishment is an aggrieved party which can impugn registration of the Respondent No.2???s-Union by the Respondent No. 01 vide Order dated 25.7.2017 in constitutional jurisdiction of this court. Hence, the instant petition is a futile exercise.
Matter:AGAINST ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 25-SEP-19


52) 3/2018 Adm. Suit GLANDER INTERNATIONAL BUNKERING DMCC (Plaintiff) V/S M.V. MISKI AND 2 OTHERS (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
It is an established Rule that pleadings themselves cannot be considered as evidence unless the Plaintiff or Defendant, as the case may be, enters the witness Box and lead the evidence in support of one???s claim or defence. Plaintiff has not come forward to testify and discharge the burden of proof about its claim. The reported decision of Hon???ble Supreme Court handed down in the case of Rana Tanveer Khan v. Naseer Khan-2015 SCMR page-1401, is relevant. Since Plaintiff has failed to prove the allegations against the Defendants, thus the Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief. Suit dismissed.
Topic: ADMIRALTY ()
Tag Line:It is an established Rule that pleadings themselves cannot be considered as evidence unless the Plaintiff or Defendant, as the case may be, enters the witness Box and lead the evidence in support of one???s claim or defence. Plaintiff has not come forward to testify and discharge the burden of proof about its claim. The reported decision of Hon???ble Supreme Court handed down in the case of Rana Tanveer Khan v. Naseer Khan-2015 SCMR page-1401, is relevant. Since Plaintiff has failed to prove the allegations against the Defendants, thus the Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief. Suit dismissed.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


53) 7/2018 Adm. Suit Fair Sea International FZC (Plaintiff) V/S MV "MISKI" & Others (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Plaintiff has incurred and still incurring expenses for supply of necessaries and other products to Defendant No.1 since or about 09.10.2017 and onwards, when the Defendant No.1 (subject Vessel) is berthed at Karachi Port; therefore, only those documents can be considered, which relate to this period and onwards, or, when the subject Vessel entered territorial waters of Pakistan and not before that. Suit of the Plaintiff is partly decreed to the extent of US Dollars-120,710.6 (US Dollars One Lac Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred and Ten only) and Pak Rupees-22,42,497/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Two Thousand and Four Hundred Ninety Seven only).
Topic: ADMIRALTY ()
Tag Line:Plaintiff has incurred and still incurring expenses for supply of necessaries and other products to Defendant No.1 since or about 09.10.2017 and onwards, when the Defendant No.1 (subject Vessel) is berthed at Karachi Port; therefore, only those documents can be considered, which relate to this period and onwards, or, when the subject Vessel entered territorial waters of Pakistan and not before that. Suit of the Plaintiff is partly decreed to the extent of US Dollars-120,710.6 (US Dollars One Lac Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred and Ten only) and Pak Rupees-22,42,497/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Two Thousand and Four Hundred Ninety Seven only).
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


54) 1431/2013 Cr.Bail MIRCHOOMAL KHATRI (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


55) 1511/2019 Const. P. Jam Mitha Khan (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Petitioner is seeking direction to the Respondents to issue notification of his post-retirement benefits, on the premise that he was appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) BPS-17 in Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) ---the petitioner???s Counsel was directed to assist this Court more particularly regarding Article 187(2) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 that whether this Court can examine and or modify the Judgment of the Hon???ble Supreme Court or only to enforce it in accordance with the law--We in the circumstances are constrained to direct Sindh Government to pay all his perks and privileges to which he was entitled to on issuance of notification of his repatriation, inclusive of his entire pensionary benefits within [02] months and report compliance through MIT-II of this court.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


56) 7655/2017 Const. P. Syed Kashif Ali (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Disciplinary proceedings against employee of PSO--We, thus, are of the view that it is for the Respondent-Company to place its employees in accordance with its Service Rules and Regulations, which is an internal matter of the Respondent-Company, thus devoid of any Constitutional interference, at this juncture. Our view is supported by the latest decision announced on 13.5.2019 by the Honorable Supreme Court in an unreported case of Maj. (R) Syed Muhammad Tanveer Abbas and other connected Appeals (2019 SCMR 984)--we are not inclined to interfere in the terms and conditions of the service of the Petitioner, in Constitutional Jurisdiction, being non-statutory Rules of Service, therefore, the instant petition is dismissed.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


57) 1322/2013 Cr.Bail MIRZA KARIM BAIG S/O MIRZA MUHAMMAD MEHBOOB BAIG (Applicant) V/S THE STATE (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Citation:2015 PCr.LJ 112
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


58) 65/2012 Const. P. Abdul Alim and others (Petitioner) V/S Govt. of Sindh and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


59) 2579/2018 Const. P. Murtaza (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


60) 3017/2018 Const. P. Muhammad Sharif & Other (Petitioner) V/S P.O Sindh & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 23-SEP-19


61) 679/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Ishaque (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
whether the petitioner can be regularized in the Respondent-Department. We have noticed that the Petitioner has admitted that he accepted the contingent/work charged appointment--Petitioner's contingent/work charged service could not be converted into regular service--The Petitioner, in our view, has failed to make out his case for regularization of his work charged service as his case is neither covered under Section 3 of Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013 nor falls within the ambit of Policy of Government of Sindh, therefore, the instant Petition is hereby dismissed along with pending application(s)---Before parting with this judgment, we may observe that that the petitioner has served from 1992 with some breaks but the fact of the matter is that he has a long service of more than two decades at his credit, therefore, it is not justified at the end of department after sucking the youth of petitioner and kicked him out on the pretext that his case does not fall in the aforesaid policy and that the post held by him being temporary and contingent/work charge paid, being not pensionable. Since the Petitioner is 58 years old and two years remaining to attain the age of superannuation, therefore, his services be continued till his date of superannuation. The salary issue of the Petitioner for the intervening period may be decided in accordance with the law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 20-SEP-19


62) 174/2010 Criminal Appeal Khalid Ali and others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 20-SEP-19


63) 670/2018 Cr.Bail Mavji @ Meo & others (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 20-SEP-19


64) 759/2019 Cr.Bail Irfan Ali (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 20-SEP-19


65) 831/2019 Cr.Bail Muhammad Umer @ Javed (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 20-SEP-19


66) 850/2019 Cr.Bail Noman & another (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 20-SEP-19


67) 5866/2019 Const. P. Faisal Memon (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
The basic grievance of the Petitioner is with regard to his surrendering of look after charge for the post of Regional Director BPS-19 in Sindh Katchi Abbadis Authority (SKAA) --Dismissed
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


68) 10/2011 Conf.Case Ali Nawaz (Appellant) V/S The State, (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


69) 226/2011 Criminal Appeal Ali Nawaz & Others (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


70) 498/2019 Const. P. Ghulam Mustafa Lund (Petitioner) V/S NAB & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


71) 499/2019 Const. P. Muhammad Nazeer (Petitioner) V/S NAB (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


72) 500/2019 Const. P. Rafq Ahmed Hakro (Petitioner) V/S NAB & Other (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


73) 865/2014 Const. P. Province of Sindh and others (Petitioner) V/S Mir Pervaiz Akhtar Talpur (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


74) 1110/2018 Const. P. Mushrif Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S Fed: of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


75) 1201/2018 Const. P. Ghulam Nabi (Petitioner) V/S Fed: of Pakistan & others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 19-SEP-19


76) 2898/2019 Const. P. Dad Rahim and Ors (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
The service of the petitioners, employees of the Fishermen???s Cooperative Society Ltd., were terminated vide letter dated 31.12.2018 issued by the Administration Department of Fishermen???s Cooperative Society. Prima-facie, the society is purely a private corporate body with no public duty; hence, a writ of mandamus would not lie against the Respondent-Society. The Respondent-Society is a co-operative society constituted under the agreement between members thereof, who are to abide by the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act, and the rules and bye-laws framed thereunder by the Society. The society is undisputedly not a department of the State and is also not a creature of any statute but merely governed by a statute. We may observe here that this Court can only interfere in the matter, if it is established that a mandatory Provision of a statute has been violated. The dispute so noted by this Court essentially related to the claims and counter claims of the private parties relating to the service matter, which in our view is an internal matter between them and rights of the petitioners are purely of a private character, not open to be dealt with in a writ petition; therefore, writ of mandamus cannot be issued under the Article 199 of the Constitution, 1973 for petitioners??? reinstatement in service.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 18-SEP-19


77) 4677/2013 Const. P. Dr. Naeem Memon (Petitioner) V/S Fed. of Pakistan and ORs (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Whether supersession is punishment---in promotion matters to such post could not be made in a mechanical manner and a variety of factors, such as examination of service records, evaluation reports of training institutions, record of disciplinary proceedings, reputation of integrity and efficiency, suitability for handling particular assignment, etc. had to be taken into consideration--- NCA Employees Service Rules 2011, on the aforesaid proposition, the matter has been set at rest by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Shafique Ahmed Khan and others v. NESCOM through Chairman Islamabad and others (PLD 2016 SC 377)] therefore, question of declaring the Chapter II of the NCA Employees Service Rules 2011 as ultra vires of Section 9, 11 of the National Command Authority Act 2010 and Articles 4,9,10-A of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 are not apropos at this stage for the reason discussed in the preceding paragraphs.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 18-SEP-19


78) 57/2019 Cr.Acq.A. Hindal Bhutto (Appellant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 18-SEP-19


79) 161/2011 Cr.Rev Abdul Khaliq Bhatti (Applicant) V/S Muhammad Hussain and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 18-SEP-19


80) 362/2011 Cr.J.A Sona Khan (Appellant) V/S State: (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 18-SEP-19


81) 1310/2019 Const. P. Ms. Faryal Sheikh (Petitioner) V/S Federal Ombudsman and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Posting and transfer of unmarried female government servants --In the light of Office Memorandum dated 17th December, 1999 as discussed supra the case of Petitioner explicitly falls within paragraph 2(i), as such Notification for transfer of the petitioner at Peshawar is declared against the policy decision of the Government of Pakistan, Cabinet Secretariat Establishment Division. Petition allowed.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


82) 5714/2016 Const. P. Qurban Ali (Petitioner) V/S Chief Sect: and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Regularization of their service under Section 3 of the Sindh (Regularization of Adhoc and Contract Employees) Act, 2013--instant Petition clearly falls within the doctrine of laches as the Petitioner filed the instant Petition in the month of October 2016 whereas the alleged cause of action accrued to them in the month of September 2013, i.e. approximately 3 years prior to the filing of the instant Petition. Those who slept over there cannot be given premium. The observations of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Ardeshir Cowasjee v. Karachi Building Control Authority (1999 SCMR 2883) is guiding principle on the issue of laches-- Dismissed.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


83) 5859/2019 Const. P. Kamran Chandio (Petitioner) V/S P.D.O.H.A and Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Inquiry proceedings against employee of PDHA. Employee of PDHA cannot approach this court in Constitutional Jurisdiction, as they are regulated by the Pakistan Defence Housing Authority Service Rules 2008, which are non-statutory.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


84) 5321/2014 Conf.Case APNA TV Channel Private Limited (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority and another (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Topic: PEMRA Ordinance, 2002 (Section 29 And 30)
Tag Line:APNA TV Channel Judgment
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


85) 308/2012 Const. P. Rizwan Akbar Arain (Petitioner) V/S Chairman NHA & ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Contempt---that no appointment made on contract basis shall be regularized retrospectively and the contract/ad-hoc period of service cannot be counted in seniority of a Civil Servant as seniority can be reckoned from the date of regular appointment. Thus, the question of regularization from the date of contract employment is misconceived.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


86) 9/2019 Cr.Misc. Asghar Ali Mallah (Applicant) V/S Spl Judge Anti-Terrorism Court SBA & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


87) 32/2019 Cr.Bail Sono Khan & Another (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


88) 33/2019 Cr.Bail Sono Khan (Applicant) V/S The State, (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


89) 66/2014 Cr.Rev Ghulam Mohammad and others (Applicant) V/S The State (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


90) 1290/2014 Const. P. Mustansir Ahmed (Petitioner) V/S SSP Hyderabad and others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Circuit at Hyderabad
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah
Order Date: 17-SEP-19


91) 4356/2014 Const. P. Mohammad Ismail (Petitioner) V/S Pakistan Steel Mills (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
the Respondent-Pakistan Steel Mills is/was competent to award minor penalty, if they find/found any employee to be guilty of the dereliction of duty, therefore, contention of the Petitioner that he was mistakenly demoted is not borne out of record.
Matter:SERVICE
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 16-SEP-19


92) 673/2016 Const. P. Ahmed Ali Saharan (Petitioner) V/S Province of Sindh and Ors (Respondent)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:APPOINTMENT
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon
Order Date: 16-SEP-19


93) 1670/2018 Suit Liaquat Ali Bhatti & others (Plaintiff) V/S Pakistan International Airlines Corporation & ors (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Tag Line:The issue involved in this Suit was in respect of promotions of private Defendants as Chief Engineers from Deputy Chief Engineers in PIA and leaving out the Plaintiffs though they were admittedly senior. It was claimed by PIA that neither seniority nor promotion is a vested right; hence, no case is made out by the Plaintiffs; however, there being no cavil to this legal proposition; such contention has been repelled by the Court and the impugned order of promotion of private defendants has been suspended, for the reason that firstly the Plaintiffs have not been provided with any reason or justification as to why they have been left out; and secondly, even the Court was not assisted as to the entire material and record for promoting private defendants, and therefore, the Plaintiffs cannot be left without any remedy. They being seniors at least ought to have been communicated with a proper response for not being considered so that they could have availed any further remedy as per law; and this has been found a valid ground for suspending the impugned order, whereas, if the management of PIA feels that due to exigency, fresh proceedings are necessary for carrying out promotion(s); then they are at liberty to do so but in accordance with the Agreement and the revised policy, if any, and so also keeping in mind the discussion made hereinabove, including consultation with Defendant No.2 as per the Agreement.
Matter:DECLARATION
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar
Order Date: 16-SEP-19


94) 1472/1998 Suit Abdul Qadir (Plaintiff) V/S Mr.Ameer Zadi& Ors (Defendant)
Sindh High Court, Karachi
Matter:DECLARATION
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
Order Date: 16-SEP-19