Legal Principle & Question Decided

Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2025 SHC 807. In this matter between Const. P. 2628/2025 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - Asrar Ahmed Khan (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.

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Const. P. 2628/2025 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2026 SHC KHI 807 PARTIES: Asrar Ahmed Khan (Petitioner) ORDER DATE: 01-APR-26 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI C.P. No.D-2628 of 2025 (Asrar Ahmed Khan versus M/s General Tyre & Rubber Company & others) _________________________________________________________________ Date Order with signature of Judge _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi

Date of hearing and order:- 01.04.2026

Mr. Asrar Ahmed Khan petitioner present in person. Mr. Shujauddin, advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. ------------------------- O R D E R

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J. – The petitioner has filed this Constitutional Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution, seeking to set aside orders dated 31.10.2024 and 20.05.2025 whereby his complaint under Sections 66 & 67 of the Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013 was dismissed. 2. The petitioner, a retired employee, claims employment for his son under Clause 11 of the CBA agreement. 3. The respondents rely on the judgment reported as PLD 2024 SC 1276 , declaring son -quota and similar appointments void , being violative of Articles 18 and 27 of the Constitution. 4. The petitioner present in person submits that the judgment has no retrospective effect as the agreement was executed in 2022. 5. With the consent of the parties, the petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner’s son in terms of the agreement, if benefits have been extended to other employees, the same should be given to the petition subject to their right to annul the agreement in light of the Supreme Court judgment, however after hearing the petitioner, within two weeks. JUDGE Shahzad Soomro JUDGE

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant