Out-of-turn promotions: SC warns defiant officers of contempt proceedings

The chief secretary was directed to ensure that court orders are implemented in letter and spirit by Monday.


Our Correspondent July 17, 2013
The judges noted that the court had annulled deputations, absorptions and out-of-turn promotions of officers. PHOTO: EXPRESS/Rashid Ajmeri

KARACHI:


Those officers, who continue to hold their deputations, absorptions and out-of-turn promotions, may face contempt proceedings, warned a Supreme Court bench on Wednesday.


The apex court’s three-member bench, headed by Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, issued this warning during a follow-up hearing of the Karachi law and order suo motu implementation case at the SC Karachi registry.

The judges noted that the court had annulled deputations, absorptions and out-of-turn promotions of officers in different departments of the Sindh government but its orders were not implemented thoroughly.

The chief secretary, Muhammad Ejaz Chaudhry, tried to explain that a dispute resolution committee had been formed to address the grievances of those officers affected by the court orders. Sindh AG Khalid Khan requested the court allow the committee time to complete the exercise and submit its report but the judges dismissed the idea. A court judgement is based on principals so no committee can be formed to interpret its orders, the judges observed, adding that the city’s law and order was worsening because the authorities were trampling with merit.

The chief secretary was directed to ensure that court orders are implemented in letter and spirit by Monday.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 18th, 2013.

E-Publications

Most Read

COMMENTS (2)

AliKuliKhan | 7 years ago | Reply

Lets change the role of the SC. Give the judges executive powers and hand over judicial role to the executive.

ashar | 7 years ago | Reply

Thank you SC. you are the only one to maintain merit in Sindh.

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