2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
QAMARUDDIN Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and others
| Citation | 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Gulzar Ahmed and Salman Hamid, JJ |
| Parties | QAMARUDDIN Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and others |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Gulzar Ahmed and Salman Hamid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (QAMARUDDIN Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dhani Bux Otho for Petitioner.
- Allah Bachayo Soomro, Addl. A.-G. along with Mir Ali Shah, Additional Director Colleges and Latif Dino Soomro, D.A.O., Hyderabad for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner who was appointed as junior clerk, joined his duty, but his salary had not been paid
Only reason for non-releasing of salary was that in the budget released by Finance Department, salary of 8 junior clerks was being drawn by Principal of the College, through computer and the petitioner's name was not received
No basis were available for non-payment of salary to the petitioner
If provision was for payment of salary to the 8 junior clerks, there could also be provision for payment of salary to the petitioner, more so when his appointment was not disputed
When the petitioner remained in the employment, it was his constitutional and legal right to receive the salary
Denial of salary to the petitioner would lead to serious consequences upon the department
Authorities were directed to release the salary of the petitioner from the date of his posting within period of two weeks, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Comments have been filed by the respondent No.3. The appointment of the Petitioner as Junior Clerk by the respondent is not in dispute so also the fact that he has joined his duty and posted at Government College Kali Mori at Hyderabad and allowed to work at Government Boys College Kotri. It is contended by the Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed on 29-7-2009 and has joined duty on 30-7-2009 but no salary has been paid to him so far. The only reason in the comments for non-releasing of salary is that in the budget released by Finance Department, salary of 8 Junior Clerks are being drawn by Principal Government College Kali Mori Hyderabad, through computer pay and the petitioner's name is still not received from the Secretary Education Department by the District Accounts Office. In the first place the appointment and posting of the petitioner is not disputed and in view of such admission there seem hardly the basis for not paying the salary of the petitioner. If there is provision for payment of salary to the 8 Junior Clerks there could also be provision for payment of salary to the petitioner more so when his appointment and posting is not disputed. Unless the petitioner remains in the employment, it is his Constitutional and legal right to receive the salary the denial of which will lead to serious consequences upon the respondents to the extent that certain cases may be registered against them and proceeded departmentally. Consequently, we allow this petition and direct the respondents to release the salary of the petitioner from the date of his posting till date within a period of two weeks. It may further be noted that non-compliance of this order will connote to defiance of the Court order resulting in taking of appropriate action by this Court. H.B.T./Q-3/K Petition allowed.