June 26, 2008	Thursday	Jamadi-us-Sani 21, 1429

KARACHI, June 25: The Sindh High Court admitted on Wednesday a writ petition moved by one of its judges against its administrative committee for not changing her date of birth.

Petitioner-judge Mrs Yasmin Abbasy submitted through Advocate Kashif Paracha that she passed her matriculation examination from the Hyderabad board of education in 1963. The matriculation certificate wrongly mentioned her date of birth as January 5, 1950. Subsequently, she joined the judicial service and while in service she requested the chief secretary that her date of birth be corrected and changed to September 5, 1951 in her service record.

The matter was placed before the administrative of the high court, which turned down her request in 1996, saying that matriculation certificates were treated as conclusive proof of the date of birth. She said if her date of birth as mentioned in her matriculation certificate were to be treated as correct, her only brother, born on December 29, 1949, would only be six days younger than her, an impossible difference of age between two siblings.

She approached the competent authority, the chief minister, but he too rejected her plea later in 1996, disregarding her father’s affidavit in this behalf.

Justice Yasmin Abbasy sought the review of the administrative committee’s 1996 decision after her elevation as a high court judge in 2007. A seven-member administrative committee rejected her plea on the ground that there was no provision in the law or rules permitting reopening of a closed case. Date of birth can only be ascertained from the matriculation certificate, it said. The judge questioned the constitution of the administrative committee as it should only have consisted of five members.

A division bench comprising Justices Rana M. Shamim and Arshad Noor Khan admitted the petition and issued a notice to the provincial government law officer for July 9.

Notice to Nadra

Another bench comprising Justices Mrs Yasmin Abbasy and Bin Yamin issued a notice to the National Database and Registration Authority in a case questioning termination of services of 11 Nadra employees.

Advocate Abdul Jabbar Korai submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they were hired to work as assistant managers, supervisors, system engineers, etc. on contractual employment for five years but have been relieved only after about one year of service. The petition would come up for hearing on a date to be fixed by office.

Reinvestigation upheld

A justice of peace or a court of law has no authority to stop the process of investigation or reinvestigation of an offence, a ruling by Justice Mahmood Alam Rizvi said.

Re-investigation of an offence was barred by an additional district and sessions judge in his capacity as justice of peace. The order was challenged by the accused through Advocate Mahmood A. Qureshi.

Justice Rizvi said in his order that the justice of peace had exceeded his authority in passing the impugned order. The new investigator should conclude his work within 15 days. The trial court proceedings would remain suspended in the meantime, the judge ordered.

Notice to chief secretary

The Sindh High Court issued a notice to the Sindh chief secretary in a petition moved by a retired public servant for extension in his service for the period he had been laid off for no fault of his before reaching the age of superannuation.

Appearing in person, former executive district officer for education, Karachi, Gul Mohammad Hajano submitted that the Supreme Court allowed senior police officers Shoaib Suddle, Wajid Ali Durrani and Shahid Hayat on June 12 to continue to serve beyond the age of retirement for the period during which they were prevented from performing their duties.

The court held that they had a right to discharge their functions but were deprived of the same in violation of Articles 2-A, 4, 9, 14, 25 and 27 of the Constitution. The order, passed with the consent of the federal government, is binding on all judicial and executive authorities of the country.

He was of the view that his case stood on the same footing as that of the police officers. He was not allowed to work for five years and eight months from 1999 to 2005 when he retired from service.

Either he remained suspended or was sent on compulsory leave or was not allowed to join duty on transfer during the last about six years of his service.

For the sake of consistency and for giving effect to the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment, Mr Hajano said he should also be allowed another five years and eight months of service and given extension till 2011. He said he was enjoying good health and was fully capable of carrying out his duties.

A division bench, comprising Justices Yasmin Abbasy and Bin Yamin Khan, ordered that notices be issued to the chief secretary and the provincial education secretary for July 14.

Bank restrained

Justice Nadeem Azhar Siddiqui, meanwhile, restrained M/s Jahangir Siddiqui Securities, JS Bank Limited and their subsidiaries from interfering in the management and operation of Hotel Ramada (formerly Midway House).

Abid S. Zuberi submitted on behalf of M/s UIG (Private) Limited, which runs the hotel, that the company had obtained certain loans and financial facilities from the defendant concerns and was regularly discharging its obligations under the various agreements.

The plaintiff acquired old Midway House on lease from the Civil Aviation Authority and the lease was still subsisting.

Meanwhile, the counsel contended, the creditor concerns instituted a suit and moved a miscellaneous application for winding up of the plaintiff company.

The suit was being defended by the plaintiff, but the defendants were obstructing and interfering in the management and operation of its hotel, now named Ramada.

Issuing notices to the defendants, the court passed an injunction against interference.