ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

C. P. No.D-1056 of 2011.
DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HONBLE JUDGE

28.04.2011.
For Katcha Peshi.

Mr. Kashif Noor Khan Pathan, advocate for petitioners, alongwith petitioner No.1 Abdul Sami.

Mr. Azizul Haque Solangi, Asst. A. G., assisted by Mr. Qazi Muhammad Bux, State Counsel.
---------------------
The petitioners claim that they were employed in 2007 and have been working since
then, but they have not been paid their salaries. This fact was disputed by the respondent
No.1/Secretary, Education Department, stating in his comments/reply that appointments were
made under some political influence and in absence of sanction of the posts (S.N.E.) and since
there was no sanctioned post, they were not posted at their place of respective postings and the
copies of the muster roll did not show any entry of the petitioners in the concerned school, where
they claim to have been posted. It is further stated by the Secretary, Education that since they did
not join duty due to non-availability of sanctioned posts, no salaries have been paid to them and
that all the documents have been maneuvered in connivance with the officer, who allowed them
joining in absence of S.N.E.

So far as the petitioner No.1 Abdul Sami is concerned, the Head Master of the
concerned school has given a certificate that the petitioner No.1 is working in Government
Primary School, Ali Bux Sarki.
In view of this factual position with regard to petitioner No.1 only, it appears that
though his order issued by E.D.O., clearly states that the order of his appointment should come
into force after sanction of the post (approval of S.N.E), therefore, his posting order issued by the
then Assistant District Officer, Education, Thul, who had signed the posting order dated
13.12.2007, is liable to pay the outstanding salaries of the petitioner No.1 from his own salary
benefits and if he has stand retired, from his pensionary benefits. The responsibility to pay the
amount out of the funds of the then Assistant District Officer, Education, Thul, is of the
Government of Sindh.
As regards the claim of the remaining petitioners No.2 to 5, since documents, on
which they rely, are disputed, as such their case cannot be decided in the constitutional jurisdiction
of this Court. They shall, however, be free to seek remedy before the Court of competent
jurisdiction, if they are so advised.
With the above observations, this petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

JUDGE