"We are disturbed to notice that the SHC has assumed the jurisdiction of the Sindh Service Tribunal and is entertaining civil suits," SC bench’s order. PHOTO: FILE
The Supreme Court took notice of the stay orders granted by the Sindh High Court (SHC) against its judgment that annulled shoulder promotions, observing that the beneficiaries of out-of-turn promotions are “liable to be proceeded against for willfully committing contempt of court.”
A two-member bench, comprising Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Amir Hani Muslim, made these observations while hearing the Sindh government’s petition against the decision of the Sindh Service Tribunal.
The tribunal had ordered the government on May 21, 2013 to grant promotion to the policeman, Noor Ahmed Odho, with retrospective effect.
The additional advocate general Muhammad Sarwar Khan told the apex court that the SHC had, in a number of constitutional petitions and civil suits, passed an interim order, which has virtually made it difficult for the provincial government to comply with the SC’s judgment passed in cases. Similarly, the directions issued by the court in the case of police officer Mirza Shahbaz Mughal could not be complied with.
In pursuance to the order, he continued, the Sindh police chief had issued a standing order to re-fix the seniority position of different police officers on their demotion line. However, the SHC, in different matters, granted interim injunction as a result of which the government cannot fix seniority position of the police officers, as per directions given by the SC.
AAG Khan added that in another case, the operation of the IG’s standing order issued in line with the apex court’s judgment was suspended.
“The police officers, who were sent on training, were withdrawn, as a consequence of which they also filed petitions,” the law officer told the judges. He contended that the government filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC for rejection the officer’s petition but instead of deciding the same, notice was issued to the plaintiff and the application is still pending adjudication.
Sarwar Khan added while the IG’s standing order was in line with the apex court’s judgment, therefore, if any party was aggrieved, it ought to have approached the Supreme Court, which is the competent authority to examine whether or not that standing order is in line with the judgment given by it.
He stated that the high court in a number of petitions and suits without applying its mind has entertained proceedings and passed order on the issue already decided by the SC. “We are also surprised to notice that in spite of the specific directions contained in the judgment of this court, which was ordered to be circulated among the learned Judges, the Suit No. 102/2013 is still pending with interim order, which is a violation of the Article 189 of the Constitution,” the bench members said in the order. “We are disturbed to notice that the SHC has assumed the jurisdiction of the Sindh Service Tribunal and is entertaining civil suits and constitutional petitions overlooking the bar contained under Article 212 of the Constitution.” The bench members therefore ordered the office to place the review petition along with the list of cases submitted by AIG Legal Ali Sher Jakhrani and AAG Sarwar Khan before the SC Chief Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani for his kind perusal and passing appropriate orders - so that the parameters under which the high court while exercising jurisdictions, either under the CPC or the Constitution, can be determined and issue be settled once for all or in the alternative.
The bench further noted that the intervention of the nature by the high court would defeat the effect of the judgment of the apex court and the beneficiaries of the instruments, which were declared as ultra vires of the Constitution through different proceedings initiated by them in the SHC in fact have attempted to defy the judgment of the SC and “are liable to be proceeded against for committing willful contempt.”
Published in The Express Tribune, January 19th, 2014.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ