Illegal appointments case: IG Sindh issued show-cause notice

Supreme Court asks Ghulam Haider Jamali to explain why he failed to respond to departmental inquiry


Our Correspondent December 23, 2015
IG Sindh Ghulam Haider Jamali. PHOTO: SINDH POLICE

KARACHI: The Supreme Court (SC) issued on Wednesday a show-cause notice to Sindh police chief Ghulam Haider Jamali to explain why he failed to respond to departmental communication regarding alleged illegal appointments in the Sindh Reserve Police (SRP) in Sukkur.

A three-member bench, headed by Justice Amir Hani Muslim, directed the inspector general (IG) of police to furnish an explanation.

The bench was hearing a human rights application seeking action against the IG and other officers over 993 appointments in SRP Sukkur, allegedly in violation of service laws.

On Wednesday, the bench heard arguments from Sindh Advocate General Abdul Fateh Malik, Additional IG Traffic Khadim Hussain Bhatti, DIGs Munir Shaikh, Aftab Ahmed Pathan and Naeem Ahmed Shaikh and perused material made available on record by them.

Sindh IGP charged with contempt of court

The record showed that illegal appointments made in the police were reported in a news report and SC took notice of it, and issued a notice to IG Jamali calling upon him to submit a report on August 19 this year.

Upon receiving the notice, the IG, in an attempt to allegedly cover up his inaction, appointed AIG Bhatti as the inquiry officer on August 24.

Bhatti submitted his report on November 11, which was found dissatisfactory by the SC.

Later, the inquiry by DIG Munir Shaikh was sent to DIG Training Abdul Khaliq Shaikh, who ordered a major penalty on then PA to DIG Training Inayatullah Qadri and former OSI to Superintendent of Police SRP Sukkur, Sub-Inspector Shah Baig Behan.

SHC indicts IG Sindh, eight other officers for contempt of court

SC judges noted that the record does not reveal that at any point the IG took action or disbelieved reports of the inquiry officers.

“We, therefore, reject the inquiry report, which is not honest and has been activated at the behest of the IG after intervention by this court,” the bench observed.

In the aforesaid peculiar circumstances of the case, we issue show-cause notice to the IG to explain why he failed to respond to recommendations in DIG Munir Shaikh’s inquiry report besides letters addressed by DIG Abdul Khaliq Shaikh and DIG Pathan, it observed further.

He [IG] should also submit an explanation as to how, in defiance of SHC Sukkur’s orders, he has approved the proposal of appointments of 126 petitioners. This explanation should reach this court within two weeks from the date of communication of this order, it was stated further.

Contempt charges against IG: A rare but not unusual indictment

The bench constituted a committee comprising AIG Khawaja, AIG Sanaullah Abbasi and AIG Naeem Sheikh to probe the matter and submit a report to the court.

“In case it is found that the appointments made are illegal, they shall be removed from service after a required show-cause notice on submission of the proposed report before this court,” the apex court ordered.

The secretary establishment division was also directed to proceed against police officers who were members of the selection board for illegal appointments, and the chief secretary Sindh or any other competent authority shall proceed against the provincial police chief who was the member of the selection board.

COMMENTS (4)

F Khan | 8 years ago | Reply @Hameed:You did not read the news report carefully.The petition is lodged by by 126 petitioners seeking SC intervention against illegal appointments of 926 people in Sukkur police.Be objective,your comments are itself speaking that you are a PTI fan.Please keep PTI agenda out of atleast a human rights case.
Sodomite | 8 years ago | Reply @Hameed: I guess there are more crooks in Sind than Punjab. Isnt that obvious Sherlock??
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
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