The Sindh High Court (SHC), expressing frustration over non-payment of pension and arrears of a late employee of the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KW&SB), ordered immediate payment of arrears and submission of report.
A bench, headed by Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, heard the petition.
Usman Farooq, counsel for the petitioners, argued that Mega Lenny, an employee of the KW&SB, died in an accident 11 years ago but his dues have not yet been paid by the Sindh government.
“Don’t make people’s lives miserable,” Justice Khan remarked, adding that the issues of the families of the deceased persons should be resolved the soonest. “Those who deserve should be facilitated and paid on time,” the judge remarked.
The public prosecutor stated that he would personally try to get the payment of the arrears cleared. The court ordered payment of arrears and submission of report by November 11.
Judgment on road closure reserved
The Sindh High Court (SHC) has reserved its judgment on a petition against the closure of Awari Tower and Metropole Hotel Road.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice Sindh High Court Justice Ahmed Ali Sheikh, heard the petition. DIG Traffic and other officials appeared in the court.
Pasban Pakistan counsel, advocate Irfan Aziz argued that motorists are facing hardship due to the road closure.
“The Supreme Court has taken notice of the Faizabad sit-in because people were suffering. The citizens are suffering due to the closure of the road towards Awari Tower and Metropole,” he contended.
Traffic police officials said that the south deputy commissioner had issued a notification to close the road while the traffic police only acted on the notification.
The deputy commissioner’s office replied that a notification to close one side of the road was issued on the recommendation of the Bureau of Traffic.
“Opening the road in prime time on the signal causes traffic jam thus the road was closed on one side to ensure swift flow of all vehicular traffic,” the DC office said.
The court reserved its judgment after counsels completed their arguments.
Appeal against conviction rejected
The Sindh High Court has rejected an appeal against the conviction of three female suspects accused of possessing more than 100kg of hashish.
A two-member bench, headed by Justice KK Agha, ruled on the appeal against the sentence for possessing more than 100 kg of hashish. The court rejected the appeal of the three women and upheld the decision of the lower court.
The lower court had sentenced Khadija, Anis and Nazia to life imprisonment and fines. According to the prosecution, the three female suspects andh others were coming to Karachi from Hub in vehicles.
On a tip-off, the police, including female officers, stopped the suspects near Town Office in Baldia and recovered more than 100 kg of hashish in packets from different vehicles.
Appeal disallowed
The Sindh High Court has rejected the appeals of the suspects against the decision of an accountability court in a reference pertaining to acquisition of a plot worth Rs300 million through forgery in Bath Island.
A two-judge SHC bench ruled on the petitions. The court rejected the pleas of accused Muhammad Imran and Faisal Masroor Siddiqui named in the reference. The accused had challenged the submission of photo copies of documents in the accountability court.
Read More: SHC annoyed over police performance in missing children case
The NAB had presented copies of documents as evidence in the accountability court. The NAB court in Karachi had made the copies of documents as part of the record. The decision of the accountability court was challenged in the high court.
The high court had reserved its decision after hearing the arguments of the counsels at the last hearing which was announced on Wednesday. The suspects are accused of forging KMC records. The suspects obtained a plot in Bath Island, Clifton, through forgery.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 4th, 2021.
COMMENTS (1)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ