2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
Syed MATLOOB AHMED Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and 3 others
| Citation | 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Mushir Alam and Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, JJ |
| Parties | Syed MATLOOB AHMED Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Workers' Welfare Fund Ordinance (XXXVI of 1971) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Workers' Welfare Fund Ordinance (XXXVI of 1971) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Mushir Alam and Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (Syed MATLOOB AHMED Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ikram Siddiqui and Zaheer-ul-Hassan Minhas for Petitioner.
- Safdar Janjua for Respondent No.4.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 3
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner, who was employee in Workers' Welfare Board, constituted under S.3 of Workers' Welfare Fund Ordinance, 1971 was transferred through impugned notification
Contention of the petitioner was that Welfare Board was an autonomous body and appointment therein was regulated by its governing body
Petitioner had placed on record the decision of the Governing Body whereby it was advised that no recruitment, appointment, posting/transfer in any cadre/grade be made without prior approval of the Workers' Welfare Fund Secretary
Secretary of the Department had conceded that the instructions were circulated by Workers' Welfare Board to all authorities to refrain from creating any new post or recruitment and appointment, even against already created vacant posts
It seemed that such instructions were not given any heed
Workers' Welfare Fund was a Federal subject and its appointment was regulated and managed by its Governing Board and the Provincial Authorities had no say in the matter of appointment and/or transfer of its employees
Such being the legal position, impugned notification was struck down and petition was allowed. Shafi Muhammad Memon State Counsel.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioners have impugned the Notification dated 5th May, 2009 whereby it appears that the petitioner is employed in Workers Board, constituted under section 3 of the Workers' Welfare Fund Ordinance, 1971. He stated that it is an autonomous Federal Body and appointment in the Welfare Board is regulated by its governing body. The petitioners have placed on record the decision of the governing body dated 4-9-2008 whereby it was advised that no recruitment, appointment, posting/transfer (on deputation or otherwise in own pay scale etc.) in any cadre/grade be made without prior approval of the W.W.F. Secretary. It seems through impugned notification that the petitioner has been transferred and through impugned notification Mr. Gahanwer Ali Leghari, officer in BS-18/Deputy Secretary (Land Utilization), Board of Revenue was transferred in his place and the petitioner was directed to report to his parent department. Notices were issued to the respondents on number of dates. The matter was adjourned on 4-6-2009 and at the request of AA.-G 15 days final time was allowed to official respondents to file their comments. It was recorded that in case no comments are filed, the matter may be heard as against the official respondents on the available record. The learned A.A.-G, on being questioned by the Court, has drawn attention of the Court to various letters addressed to the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh and other concerned including letter dated 26-5-2009. Even the Section Officer, Government of Sindh, Service General Administration has issued the reminders to the Secretary to the Government of Sindh on 10-6-2009 and 27-6-2009 to respond to the petition but none has become forward. Therefore, it appears that the respondents Nos.1 and 2 are not interested to defend their position. The respondent No.4 have filed the comments. They have conceded the claim of the petitioner in para.7 of the reply. It is categorically stated that the instructions were circulated by Workers' Welfare Board to all authorities to refrain from creating with any new post or recruitment and appointment even against already created vacant post and for further orders and the reminders were also issued on 30-5-2009 drawing their attention to the decision of the Workers' Welfare Fund Board referred to above. It appears that the Government of Pakistan through Secretary Malik Asif Hayat has also reminded the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh Mr. Fazal-ur-Rehman through reminder dated 27-5-2009 to the effect that W.W.F. is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Labour and Manpower and it is not advisable to make any recruitment, appointment or transfer without prior approval of the W.W.F. Secretary and he was requested to follow such' directions. It seems that such instructions were not given any heed. The learned A.A.-G present in Court is not able to defend the position created by issuance of the impugned notification dated 5-5-2009. It appears that in the similar facts and circumstances, a similar notification issued in Quetta was agitated before the Court in C.P. No.423 of 2009 and such notification was suspended. From record it appears that the Workers Welfare Fund is a Federal subject and its appointment is regulated and managed by its Governing Board and the provincial authorities have no say in the matter of appointment and/or transfer of its employees. This being the legal position, the impugned notification is accordingly struck down and the petition is allowed. H.B.T./M-179/K Petition allowed.