Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: Const. P. 715/2024 (SHC)
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Petitioner: Const. P. 715/2024 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas - Muhammad Ibhrahim & others (Petitioner)
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as Const. P. 715/2024 (SHC). In this matter between Const. P. 715/2024 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas - Muhammad Ibhrahim & others (Petitioner) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Const. P. 715/2024 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Circuit Court, Mirpur Khas CITATION: 2025 SHC MPK 1596 PARTIES: Muhammad Ibhrahim & others (Petitioner) ORDER DATE: 21-MAY-25 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arbab Ali Hakro, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Riazat Ali Sahar(Author) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ IN HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COU RT MIRPURKHAS
C.P No.D - 721
of 2024
[ Muhammad Yaqoob
Anjum
v. Province of Sindh &
others ]
C.P No.D - 722
of 2024
[ Mazhar Muhammad v. Province of Sindh &
others ]
C.P No.D - 838
of 2024
[ Muhammad Younis
v. Province of Sindh &
others ]
C.P No.D - 1715
of 2024
[ Mufti Muhammad Yaseen
v. Province of Sindh &
others ]
C.P No.D - 205
of 202 5
[ Abdul Razzak
v. Province of Sindh &
others ]
Before :
Mr. Justice Arbab Ali Hakro
Mr. Justice Riazat Ali Sahar
Petitioner s :
Through M/s. Karamullah Memon, Haji Qalandar Bux, Rana
Rahail
Mehmood, Advocates.
Mr. Nabi Bux Leghari advocate for Interveners.
Respondent s :
Through Mr. Muhammad Sharif Solangi Assistant A.G. Sindh along with Secretary Agriculture Department [Sohail Ahmed Qureshi], Director General Agriculture Marketing [Ghafar Ahmed Memon], Administrator M.C. Mirpurkhas [Zulfiqar Ali Jagirani] and Secretary M.C Mirpurkhas [Muhammad Idrees].
Mr. Muharam Abro advocate for respondent No.7 and 8 in
C.P. No.D - 205 of 2025.
Date s
of Hearing :
21 . 0 5 .20 25
Date of Decision :
21 . 0 5 .2025
2
JUDGMENT
RIAZAT ALI SAHAR
J : - The above - captioned petitions have been filed by petitioners
who are or were employees of the Agriculture Department. Most of the petitioners have retired after rendering several years of service to the department. However, one of the petitioners, namely Mufti Muhammad Yaseen Rind Baloch, is still in service and cu rrently performing his duties as Pesh Imam.
2 .
The petitioner, Muhammad Yaqoob (C.P. No.D - 721 of 2024) was appointed as a Junior Clerk on 02.09.1981 and after promotions, ultimately retired as an Inspector (BPS - 11) on 21.10.2012 upon attaining the age of superannuation (60 years). Although his pension papers were duly approved by the respondent, Director General, Agriculture Extension, Sindh Hyderabad, in 2013, he was only granted his monthl y pension, gratuity/commutation
and le ave encashment in February 2 021 following strict directives issued by this Honorable Court at the Sukkur Bench.
Despite this delayed relief, the petitioner has yet to receive a total amount of Rs. 648,202/ -
in unpaid monthly salaries for the period he was posted at the Market Committ ee, Mirpurkhas. Furthermore, since March 2021, the petitioner has not been receiving his monthly pension.
Nearly ten years have passed since his retirement, yet the petitioner continues to suffer due to the non - disbursement of his legitimate entitlements.
3 .
The petitioner, Mazhar Muhammad
( C.P. No.D - 722 of 2024) was appointed as Junior Clerk - cum - Typist on 01.12.1 974 and
after
promotions, ultimately retired as Inspector (BPS - 11) on 30.04.2014 upon attaining the superannuation age of 60 years. Although pension papers
of the petitioner were approved by the respondent
Director
General Agriculture Extension
Sindh
3 Hyderabad in 2016
it was only after strict directions issued by this Honorable Court at the Sukkur Bench that he was finally granted his monthl y pension, gratuity/commutation
and leave encashment in February 2021.
Despite this partial relief, the petitioner has not been paid outstanding monthly salaries amounting to Rs. 433,943/ -
for the period during which he served at Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, as well
as an additional three months’ salary of Rs. 33,000/ -
for his service at Market Committee, Digri. Moreover, the petitioner has not received his monthly pension since April 2021.
More than a decade has passed since his retirement, yet the petitioner contin ues to endure undue hardship in securing his rightful post - retirement dues.
4 .
The petitioner, Muhammad Younis (C.P. No.D - 838 of 2024) served as Chief Inspector (BPS - 15) and retired on 31.05.2021. According to the petitioner, he was deprived of his pensionary
benefits under various pretexts. Consequently, he filed Constitutional Petition No.1707 of 2021 before this Court at the Circuit Court, Hyderabad. In the said proceedings, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Sindh was summoned and by order dated 01.0 9.2022 directed to ensure payment of the petitioner’s dues within one month. However, despite the disposal of the said petition, the petitioner was not paid his outstanding pensionary dues. It was only after filing a contempt application that he received R s.3,348,824/ -
from the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, and Rs.100,000/ -
from the Market Committee, Kot Ghulam Muhammad. Nonetheless, the petitioner remains unpaid for several salary arrears, including:
Rs. 1,028,519/ -
for the period May 2020 to May 2021 from the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas;
Rs. 858,035/ -
for the period September 2014 to September 2016 from the Market Committee, Kot Ghulam Muhammad;
4
Rs. 787,197/ -
for the period August 2018 to July 2019 from the Market Committee, Hala.
The total outstanding salar y arrears amount to Rs.2,673,751/ - , which remain unpaid. In addition, the petitioner’s monthly pension has not been released since April 2023.
5 .
An application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 CPC was filed in C.P. No. D - 838 of 2024 by the inte rveners Inayat Ali (Inspector, BPS - 11), Faqeer Muhammad (Junior Inspector, BPS - 10), Zaheeruddin (Typist, BPS - 05), Muhammad Azam (Electrician, BPS - 05), Sikandar Ali (Driver, BPS - 04), and Iqbal Ashique (Sweeper, BPS - 02) all employees of the Market Committee,
Mirpurkhas, in January 2025. Through the said application, they prayed to be impleaded as petitioners in the proceedings. The interveners contended that, vide order dated 29.05.2018 passed in C.P. No. D - 7336/2015, a formula had been proposed by the respon dents therein for the payment of arrears and other pensionary benefits to the petitioners of that case and similar others who retired from various Market Committees across Sindh. The application is allowed and the applicants are accordingly impleaded and t reated as petitioners in the present proceedings.
6 .
The petitioner, Mufti Muhammad Yaseen Rind
(C.P. No.D - 1715 of 2024) is serving as a Pesh Imam in BPS - 12. However, his salary has remained unpaid since the years 2014 – 2015. According to the petitioner, it ha s become a routine practice of the respondents to disburse only half a month’s salary every three to four months, while the remaining dues continue to accumulate without payment by the department.
The petitioner states that in 2019, the respondents prepare d a statement outlining the outstanding salaries of various employees, in which his
unpaid salary was recorded for a pe riod of 62 months, totaling Rs. 1,774,409/ - . The sole justification provided by the
5 respondents for this non - payment was an alleged shorta ge of funds.
This irregular and discriminatory practice has continued unabated
and the petitioner now claims that approximately 130 months’ worth of salaries remain outstanding. He further contends that the excuse of a shortage of funds is baseless, as off icers of the Market C ommittee Mirpurkhas, par ticularly those in higher ranks, are receiving their salaries regularly without any delay or interruption. There are no salary arrears for such officers, indicating that the alleged fund shortage disproportionat ely and unjustly affects only lower - grade employees like the petitioner.
Accordingly, the petitioner seeks payment of all outstanding salaries due from September 2015 onwards, along with a direction to ensure the regular and uninterrupted disbursement of his monthly salary.
7 .
The petitioner, Abdul Razzak
(C.P. No.D - 205 of 2025) served as a Mali (BPS - 02) in the Agriculture Department and was posted at the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas. He retired from service on 01.06.2023. However, despite the passage of considerable time, he has not been released his monthly pension to date.
H e claims that more than 20 months’ pension payments also remain outstanding.
Furthermore, the petitioner states that an amount of Rs.2,458,393/ -
in unpaid salary, accruing since the year 2019, is still outstanding against the Market Committee. Accordingly, the petitioner prays for the immediate release of his current and outstanding pension, along with the disbursement of all pending dues and post - retirement benefits, including the af orementioned outstanding salaries, from the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas.
8 .
Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, the respondents submitted their comments. In their statement, the Chairman/Administrator and Secretary of the Market Committee, Mirpurkha s, acknowledged that partial payments of
6 the petitioners’ pensionary benefits have been made. They further contended that, under Section 14 of the Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939, the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, is a body corporate operating on a self - finance basis and does not receive any funds or grants from the Government. In compliance with the directions of this Court, and due to the unavailability of funds, the Market Committee arranged for the rental of one of its godowns and the entire rent
amount received was disbursed to the petitioner(s). It was further submitted that, at present, the Market Committee has no available funds. However, the remaining amount of the petitioners’ pensionary dues will be paid as and when funds become available. The financial condition of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, was described as severely constrained, with difficulties in disbursing regular staff salaries as well as pensions. Moreover, it was mentioned that several similar petitions are pending before the
Court.
The respondents assured the Court that the Market Committee would continue paying the regular monthly pensions to the petitioners from whatever funds are available. Nevertheless, they also contended that, under the provisions of the Agricultural Pr oduce Ma rkets Act, 1939
and the Rules of 19 4 0, the Market Committee was const ituted as an independent entity
and therefore, the instant petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed in the interest of justice.
9 .
The Secretary Agriculture, Supply
& Prices Department, Government of Sindh, Karachi in his statement has referred Section 14 of Agricultural Produce Markets , Act, 1939 and Rule 14 (7) of Sindh Market Committee Unified Grade Service Rules 1983, Amended on 04.06.2012, Market Committee is
so lely responsible for payment of post - retirement benefits to its employees, as such, Chairman/Administrator and Secretary of
7 the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas are liable to clear the dues of the petitioners.
10 .
The Director General, Agriculture Marketing, Sindh, Hyderabad, in his statement, submitted that under the Sindh Market Committee Unified Grade Service Rules, 1983 pursuant to Notification No. SO (PMP)/5(396)/2008 dated 04.06.2012 the responsibility for payment of monthly pension and any outstanding d ues lies with the respective Market Committee where the member of the service retires or, as the case may be, expires. Accordingly, the Administrator and Secretary of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, are the competent authorities legally responsible for d isbursing the pensionary benefits to the petitioners.
11 .
The Additional Finance Secretary on behalf of Finance Department, Government of Sindh in pursuance of order passed on 25.06.2024 files statement where stated that as per section 13 of the Sindh Wholesal e Agricultural Produce Markets (Development & Regulation) Act, 2010, which stipulates “Each notified market shall be operated by its market company in such manner as shall ensure that such wholesale market is financially self - sustaining without recourse to
lending, grants, or the injection of further equity or other assistance from the Government . ”
As per section 11 (2) of the Act “ Pension, gratuity, commutation and other service benefits as the case may be admissible to such employees including the employe es who retired or died while serving in the Market Committees together with the employees of Market Committees Pool Fund before the commencement of this Act shall be the responsibility of the successor Market Committees
and settled in the manner as may be prescribed. ”
The Additional Secretary also referred section 20 (i ) and 21 (v) of the Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1939 i.e. (a) 20 (i)
–
all moneys received by a Market Committee shall be paid
8 into a fund to be called the “Market Committee Fund”. All ex penditure incurred by a Market Committee under or for the purposes of this act shall be defrayed out of the said fund
(b) 21 (v)
–
the pay, leave compassionate and Medical leave allowances, gratuities and pension and contribution towards leave allowances o r provident fund of the persons employed by the market committee shall be expended from the market committee fund.
12 .
In compliance with the orders of this Court, the Secretary to the Government of Sindh, Agriculture, Supply and Prices Department, appeared in
person and submitted a compliance/progress report, which is taken on record. The Administrator and Secretary of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, were also present and handed over original cheques to the respective petitioners, as detailed below:
a )
In C.P. No. D - 721 of 2024, two cheques were handed over:
Cheque No. 1383997058 dated 26.05.2025 for Rs. 138,042/ -
Cheque No. 1383997059 dated 25.06.2025 for Rs. 100,000/ -
b )
In C.P. No. D - 722 of 2024, two cheques were handed over:
Cheque No. 1383997056 dated 26.05.2025 for Rs. 100,000/ -
Cheque No. 1383997057 dated 25.06.2025 for Rs. 59,978/ -
c )
In C.P. No. D - 838 of 2024, one cheque was handed over:
Cheque No. 1383997060 dated 26.05.2025 for Rs. 100,000/ -
d )
In C.P. No. D - 1715 of 2024, one cheque was handed over:
Che que No. 1383997061 dated 26.05.2025 for Rs. 100,000/ -
13 .
The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that despite years of service and formal approval of their pensionary
benefits, the petitioners have faced inordinate delays and partial
9 disbursements.
He contended that repeated non - payment of salaries and pensions, despite clear court directives, constitutes a violation of constitutional and service rights and the petitioners are suffering financially post - retirement due to the negligent and discrimina tory conduct of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas. He has further contended that the excuse of a lack of funds is baseless, especially when higher officials continue to receive uninterrupted salaries. He prayed for directions for full disbursement of all ou tstanding dues, including pensions, salaries, gratuity, and other post - retirement benefits without further delay.
14 .
The learned counsel for the intervener s /petitioners adopted the arguments of the main petitioners and added that his clients are also
employee s of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas. He contended
that their claims are supported by a precedent
of C.P. No.D - 7336/2015 , in which a formula for arrears and pe nsion benefits was agreed upon; however, d espite being eligible, the interveners have been exclu ded without justification. He prayed that they be treated equally and be granted the same relief extended to the main petitioners, in the interest of equity and justice.
15 .
The learned A.A.G. Sindh has contended
that under Section 14 of the Agricultural Produ ce Markets Act, 1939
and Rule 14
(7) of the Sindh Market Committee Unified Grade Service Rules, 1983 , the responsibility for pensionary and salary payments lies solely with the Market Committee, which is a self - financed, autonomous body. He further contend ed
that the Government of Sindh does not provide financial aid or grants to Market Committees. Referring to the Sindh Wholesale Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 2010 , he highlighted
that each Market Committee must remain financially self - sustaining. Howev er, he assured that the provincial government is
10
committed to ensuring compliance with court orders and supporting lawful resolutions.
16 .
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and
carefully examined the record available on file.
17 .
It is relevant to mention here that o ut of all these petitions, two petitions i.e. C.P. No.D - 721 of 2024 and C.P. No.D - 722 of 2024, have already been disposed of by this Court
vide Common Order dated 12.08.2024. The operative part of the said order is reproduced: -
“ 5.
This is a matter of grave concern that for several years ,
the long and unjustified delay in payment of pensions has been a source of tremendous hardship and humiliation to retiring officials and their families. Despite strictures and orders passed by the Honour able Supreme Court of Pakistan in its various pronouncements and simplified guidelines laid down by the government, petitions on account of delay persist. It is well - settled law that no pension granted or continued to the pensioner is liable to seizur e
by the department under Pension Act, 1871 ,
and the rules, framed thereunder. Besides, there is no power for the Government to withhold Gratuity and Pension during the pendency of the departmental proceeding or criminal proceeding , if any. Even it does not giv e any power to withhold Leave Encashment at any stage either before the proceeding or after the conclusion of the proceeding.
6.
In the light of the foregoing, we direct the competent authority of the respondents to resolve the issue of pension and servic e benefits of the petitioner if not earlier resolved, including arrears if any outstanding, in its true perspective, within one month; and if they are entitled under the law, in terms of the ratio of the judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Haji
Muhammad Ismail Memon
PLD 2007 SC 35 .
7.
These petitions stand disposed of in the terms of the ratio of the Judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Haji Muhammad Ismail Memon. ”
11
18 .
Despite clear and unambiguous directions issued by this Court, the respondents failed to comply with the said order. Consequently, both petitioners in the referenced petition filed Contempt Applications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Contempt of Court Act. In their respective replies, the respondents sought to d eflect responsibility by attributing the failure to comply with the Administrator and Secretary of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas, who, however, had already expressed their inability to make payments due to an alleged shortage of funds.
19 .
The material avai lable on record establishes a deeply troubling pattern of administrative apathy and institutional failure on the part of the Administrator and Secretary of the Market Committee, Mirpurkhas. They have consistently failed to discharge their statutory obligat ions to both serving and retired employees. After meticulous perusal and condition, we believe that this failure is not incidental or occasional but systemic and prolonged as evident from the years - long delays in releasing lawfully earned salaries, pension s, gratuities, and post - retirement benefits. This
nonpayment
is not merely a breach of internal administrative duties but a denial of constitutionally protected rights guaranteed under Articles 9 and 25 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakist an , 1973 . T he right to livelihood, dignity
and non - discriminatory treatment is not conditional upon the fiscal health of a subordinate statutory body. Any justification based on alleged lack
of funds stands nullified in the face of regular payments being m ade to senior officers, while junior or retired employees continues
to be illogically
and selectively deprived of their rightful dues. This discriminatory treatment amounts to financial victimization and challenges
the core principle of equal protection of
the law. The respondents have also failed to take proactive measures to
12
supplement
revenue streams, optimize available resources, or prioritize pending liabilities, despite having the legal tools to do so under the relevant enactments. This continuing ina ction reflects culpable neglect and amounts to constructive defiance of lawful court orders.
20 .
The statutory scheme
under the Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939, reinforced by Rule 14
(7) of the Sindh Market Committee Unified Grade Service Rules, 1983, creates an unambiguous obligation upon Market Committees to discharge all financial liabilities including payment of salaries, pensions, leave encashment and other service - related entitlements from the Market Committee Fund. Section 20
(i) and 21(v) of the
1939 Act expressly designate such expenditures as valid charges upon the Fund. This obligation is not optional, nor does it admit postponement on the basis of internal administrative convenience. Furthermore, the Sindh Wholesale Agricultural Produce Marke ts (Development and Regulation) Act, 2010, particularly Sections 11 and 13, continues this responsibility by transferring the entire service burden of employees, including post - retirement obligations, to the successor Market Committees . The language of Sec tion 11 makes it clear that employees, both existing and retired, retain full rights to service benefits under the same terms prevailing before the transfer. The statutory mandate of financial self - sustainability under Section 13 requires market companies to operate in a fiscally responsible and autonomous manner without seeking external injections from the government. Failure to comply with these obligations amounts to statutory non - performance and administrative misconduct, exposing the officers to legal consequences. The law thus admits no vacuum in responsibility; it demands execution, not excuses.
21 .
It is worthwhile to note here that t he binding authority of the Honourable Supreme Court in Haji
13
Muhammad Ismail Memon v. Government of Sindh (PLD 2007 SC 35)
conclusively affirms that pensionary and post - retirement benefits are not acts of kindness
but constitutionally enforceable rights. Th is
judgment underscores that pensions and gratuities accrue as vested property rights
the moment an employee retires
and any delay in disbursement constitutes a continuous infringement of fundamental rights. The Honourable Supreme Court clearly held that there exists no legal basis for withholding pensionary benefits, even in cases of pending departmental or criminal proceed ings. By necessary extension, the non - payment of such benefits in the absence of any di sciplinary or legal proceedings, let alone in vi olation of express court orders, stands as an aggravated contempt of constitutional values and judicial authority. The in stant case reveals not merely a lapse in disbursement, but an institutional habit of avoidance
and deferment , which this Court cannot condone . The jurisprudence laid down in the aforementioned judgment is directly applicable and binding under Article 189 o f the Constitution. Any attempt to shift the burden of responsibility from one department to another does not dilute this liability but further accentuates the need for structural intervention and judicial oversight.
22 .
For what has been discussed and in the
light o f the facts, the settled law
as well as
in the spirit of C.P. No. D - 7336/2015
and the formula evolved therein, we
hereby dispose of the remaining petitions (C.P. No. D - 838 of 2024, C.P. No. D - 1715 of 2024, and C.P. No. D - 205 of 2025)
and the connected Contempt Applications
with the following mandatory directions :
A.
A High - Level Committee shall be constituted within seven (7) days
under the supervision of the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh (Chairman) , comprising the following m embers: -
14
1 .
Secretary, Agriculture, Supply & Prices Department .
2 .
Director General, Agriculture Marketing,…
Read the unabridged text and precedent citation network on Al Wakeelo Legal Research Platform.