HYDERABAD: Official asked to comply with court orders
By Our Correspondent
HYDERABAD, Aug 29: The Hyderabad circuit bench of the Sindh High Court on Tuesday warned the EDO education of the Umerkot district that extreme action, including contempt of court proceedings, would be initiated against him if he did not comply with orderds of the court with in one month.
The court passed the order on a constitutional petition filed by Chettan Kumar, Aqeela Khanum, Arifa Durrani, Umela Devi and Vidviyas.
The petitioners are junior school teacher, high school teacher, primary school teacher and junior clerk.
They requested the court to direct respondents to implement tribunal’s judgement in their appeals and release their salaries.
Sindh assistant AG Rasheed Qureshi along with EDO (education) Prof Jan Mohammad Nohri and Tharparkar EDO (education) Mohammad Achar appeared in the court.
The AAG told the court that the EDO had deposited cheques in respect of petitioners Aqeela Khanum, Umela Devi and Vidviyas with the additional registrar of the court as per previous order.
The court found that three cheques were deposited in favour of three petitioners by the EDO Umerkot in August.
Petitioners’ counsel said that the cheques represent only one month salary while Chetan Kumar had been paid salary of five months and remaining petitioners only one month.
The EDO said that he had submitted bills for payment of balance salaries of petitioners and balance payment would be made to petitioners very soon.
The court ordered that cheques received from the EDO education on August 24 be disbursed to petitioners on their identification and verification and balance amount would be deposited before next date of hearing.
The petitioners said that they had filed departmental appeals for the release of their salaries and then filed appeal before the Sindh Services Tribunal after statutory delay in Karachi.
They said that the tribunal allowed their appeals while directing respondents to release salaries of petitioners for the period they have performed their duties within 90 days from the date of receipt of judgement.
They said that in spite of lapse of more than 90 days of receiving the judgement of tribunal the respondents did not comply with the order of tribunal.
They said that the respondents were legally required to comply with the order.
They prayed the court to direct respondents to implement tribunal’s judgement in their appeals and release salaries to them.
The EDO and DO education said that petitioners obtained judgement from tribunal fraudulently and without any documentary proof and that Arifa Durrani never worked as a high school teacher in sub-division nor she performed duty in girls’ middle school and her name was not available in school’s muster-roll hence she was not entitled to salary.
