HYDERABAD, Oct 28: The Hyderabad circuit bench of the Sindh High Court has been informed that the 60 police constables whom the court had ordered to reinstate in service after their appointment orders were withdrawn by the DPO, have joined duties.

DPO Javed Alam Odho confirmed on Wednesday that they joined service in pursuance of court’s order dated Oct 20. “On Tuesday, we communicated to the court that its order has been complied with,” he said.

A division bench comprising Justice Amir Hani Muslim and Justice Ahmed Ali Shaikh had on Tuesday directed the DPO to allow the 60 cops to join duties by Wednesday.

The court disposed of the petition after a statement signed by the DPO and backed by a photo copy of the order signed by AIG (establishment) to reinstate the police constables was placed before it.

The court had directed the RPO on Oct 20 to review adverse action taken by the department against the petitioners or appear in court on Oct 27 to satisfy it whether such order could be passed under the law. The court had observed that the petitioners had been thrown out without invoking provisions of Civil Servants Act.

The petitioners were sons of police personnel who were entitled to jobs in the department under sons’ quota. Their counsel Taj Mohammad Kaimkhani advocate said that they eligible to be appointed as police constable.

The RPO sent a list of candidates who were approved for the posts under sons’ quota after a letter was sent to him by DIG on June 26, 2008. The list was then sent to DIG of police training and inspection Sindh and the DPO issued a letter to the medical superintendent of the Police Hospital Hyderabad issuing the candidates physical fitness certificates.

After completion of other service-related formalities they were appointed to the post of constables and were allotted buckle numbers and jointed the department on April 25, 2009. They were issued uniforms and they started performing duties but later the DPO withdrew appointment orders without any justification and their salaries were stopped, said the petitioners.

They approached the PPO and appealed to him for withdrawal of DPO’s order but in vain. They, however, continued to perform duties regularly and kept requesting the respondents to pay them salary, they said.
Tags: