Court orders: SC asks Sindh govt to stop frequent transfers and postings

Apex court asked revenue authorities for computerisation of unregistered state lands across Sindh within a year


Our Correspondent February 27, 2015
Apex court asked revenue authorities for computerisation of unregistered state lands across Sindh within a year. PHOTO: RASHID AJMERI/EXPRESS

KARACHI: The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday directed the Sindh government to refrain from frequently transferring and posting officers on key posts without any justification in future.

The apex court also gave a year’s time to the revenue authorities for completing the computerisation of unregistered state lands across the province to end land grabbing, which is rampant in various cities.

A two-member bench, comprising Justices Amir Hani Muslim and Maqbool Baqar, passed this direction while hearing a case involving a land dispute.

During Friday’s proceedings, the Board of Revenue’s senior member Malik Israr Hussain appeared with his subordinates.

When the bench members asked him about the status of the process of regularising state lands as ordered by the apex court three years ago, Hussain appeared totally blank about the state of affairs in his own department.

The situation became more interesting when Hussain, who became too nervous to make any reply, said that he had been given charge of the post against his will.

His reply irked the judges, who expressed their displeasure over state of affairs in the province.

They noted with serious concern that the continuous transfers and postings of the officers on the highest posts were affecting governance in the province.

Justice Amir Hani Muslim remarked that the Sindh government had changed three home secretaries and two senior members of the board of revenue within a few months.

COMMENTS (1)

reader | 9 years ago | Reply maybe first court should ask for removal of zardari and then all these problems will be solved automatique.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ