Apex court seeks replies from parties for SSGC employees’ regularisation

Gas utility had challenged the SHC’s decision to regularise 47 contract employees


Our Correspondent April 02, 2019
Gas utility had challenged the SHC’s decision to regularise 47 contract employees. PHOTO: FILE

KARACHI: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday sought replies and issued notices to the parties on a petition regarding the regularisation of 47 employees of Sui Southern Gas Company (SSGC). A two-member bench, comprising Justice Maqbool Baqar and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, was hearing the plea at the SC's Karachi registry.

The counsel for SSGC maintained that Muhammad Ali Shah and 46 other employees do not have a direct connection with the organisation so they cannot be regularised. The counsel for SSGC maintained that the contract employees had earlier approached Sindh High Court for regularisation and the court had ordered their regularisation to be done within two months. The petitioner requested the apex court that the high court decision be annulled. The court, seeking replies and issuing notices, adjourned the hearing.

SC approached for inquiry into Rao Anwar's ‘444 killings’

Pre-arrest bail

The SC granted pre-arrest bail on Monday to accused Abdul Razzaq against a surety of Rs5 million in a case of the bouncing of a cheque for Rs5 million in a business transaction.

A two-member bench, comprising Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, was hearing the bail plea. The counsel for accused maintained that his client and the plaintiff had entered a contract worth Rs1 billion for mango farms but he was accused in a bounced cheque case.

Justice Shah remarked that such incidents project a bad image for the country. The court, accepting the bail plea, directed the accused to submit Rs1m in cash and remaining Rs4m worth of property documents as surety.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 2nd, 2019.

Our Publications

Most Read

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