November 29, 2008	Saturday	Ziqa'ad 30, 1429

KARACHI, Nov 28: The Sindh High Court on Friday issued notices in two suo motu petitions alleging ‘disappearance’ of a former Guantanamo detainee and a police constable and also asked an additional advocate-general to help ascertain their whereabouts.

Petitioner Munni Begum submitted that her son, Abrar Ahmad, a police constable, did not return from his police station at Umerkot on October 6. When she asked the SHO about his whereabouts, he said Abrar had gone to Sehwan Sharif.

Abrar could not, however, be traced and her applications to the senior government functionaries failed to elicit any response. She said she and her husband were about 80 years of age and their son was the family’s only breadwinner. She addressed a letter to Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, who converted it into a petition.

The petition came up before a division bench comprising Justices Khilji Arif Hussain and Dr Qamaruddin Bohra. Issuing notices to respondent ministries and agencies, the bench asked Additional Advocate-General Masood A. Noorani to personally look into the petitioner’s plea and try to find out her son’s whereabouts.

Mst Munir Naseer alleged that her husband was picked up by plainclothes personnel of some law-enforcement agency on October 26 from their residence in Sector D-7, North Karachi. He had undergone detention at the notorious Guantanamo Bay prison on suspicion of being a ‘Jihadi’ but was released in 2003 when allegations against him were found baseless.

On his return home, his name was included in the fourth schedule to the Anti-Terrorism Act and he regularly visited the Taimuria police station for three years till his name was taken off the schedule. However, he was picked up on October 26 without his captors disclosing their identity or serving any warrant on him or subsequently informing her of his whereabouts. Her inquiries failed to find any clue and she wrote a letter to the CJ.

AAG Masood Noorani was asked to help trace Munir Naseer and make a statement on Dec 16.

Keamari nazim restrained

Justice Gulzar Ahmed, meanwhile, restrained the Keamari town nazim and other respondents from demolishing or otherwise interfering with a petitioner’s possession of his property.

Petitioner Iqbal Baloch claimed that he owned a 1.25-acre plot of land in Trans-Lyari, Hawkesbay, and lived in a house built by him on a part of it. On October 8 some people claiming to be elected representatives came to his house and asked him to set apart a 60-square-foot parcel of land out of his plot for construction of a ‘memorial’ for the late prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

Issuing notices, the judge asked Assistant Advocate-General Kazi Javed to submit a reply on behalf of the official respondents, including the local government department, on Dec 23. Meanwhile, the respondents were asked not to interfere with the property.

‘Encadrement’

The Sindh High Court restrained the establishment division from proceeding with the promotion of police officers till January 14, 2009, the next date of hearing of a Sindh Police superintendent’s plea for induction into the Police Service of Pakistan.

Petitioner Syed Ghiasuddin Rashidi submitted through Advocate Shabbir Ahmed Awan that he was recommended for induction into the PSP or ‘encadrement’ by the provincial government in October 2007. Out of 46 police officials who rose through the ranks, 36 were recommended by the provincial selection committee against the Sindh quota of 40. The establishment division, however, took no action on the recommendation and the central selection board was due to meet shortly to consider PSP officers’ promotion to grade 18 and 19. The board’s decision would affect his seniority in the PSP.

Deputy Attorney-General Ashraf Khan Mughal submitted of behalf of the federal respondents that the establishment division addressed four letters to the provincial government to send detailed particulars and documents of the candidates recommended by it for induction into the PSP but there was no satisfactory response. Promotions in the service could not be put on hold indefinitely, the law officer said, asserting that no mala fides were involved.

Assistant Advocate-General Adnan Karim Memon submitted on behalf of the provincial respondents that the cases of a number of officials for and against out-of-turn promotions were pending in the high court. The inter se seniority of the Sindh police officials had to be decided first before sending their cases for induction into the PSP. Both the law officers sought time for filing detailed replies on behalf of the federal and provincial respondents and the bench adjourned the hearing to Jan 14 and directed the establishment to maintain the status quo till then.

A number of provincial police officers, including SSP Niaz Khoso and Farooq Awan and SPs Omar Khattab, Aftab Halepoto, Hasan Dal and Khurram Waris, have, meanwhile, moved the high court against withdrawal of orders for their out-of-turn promotions. The petitioners said they were given accelerated promotion for their meritorious services under Section 9A of the Sindh Civil Servants Act and the government should be restrained from depriving them of their vested rights.

College case

A Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Mohammad Moosa K. Leghari, meanwhile, fixed Dec 17 as the date for hearing of the Government Allama Iqbal College case. Advocate Rasheed A. Razvi appeared for the college principal and sought a date for detailed arguments. The request was allowed. Advocate-General M. Yusuf Leghari is representing the education department and Advocate Aziz A. Munshi for the claimant to the ownership of the plot attached to the college.

Liaquat Ali Sahi of the ‘save AI College committee’ said the case was not properly pursued by the government in the lower courts and the officials, in complicity with a builder and developer sold the plot.

A Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices Zia Pervez, Sabihuddin Ahmed and Sarmad Jalal Osmany, meanwhile, reserved its decision on an appeal moved by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan against a 2000 SHC order holding that since two workers detained by a kiln owner had admittedly received their wages in advance, they were under an obligation to render the service they had already been paid for.

Appearing for the HRCP, Advocate Iqbal Haider said the SHC verdict was repugnant to the law enacted by parliament against bonded labour and also to the Supreme Court judgments.