HYDERABAD, Jan 10: The Sindh High Court, Hyderabad circuit bench, here on Thursday called for amendments to the Sindh Tenancy Act 1950 to bring it in conformity with the requirements of ground realities.

Since the entire controversy relating to haris and landlords stems from the loans taken by peasants, it is therefore recommended that borrowing and any ensuing dispute be regulated strictly under the Sindh Tenancy Act (STA) till the limit of such lending/borrowing is fixed and appropriate changes are brought in the existing law, the court ruled.

It also ordered that the copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Sindh government through the ministry of law to consider the recommendations for taking effective steps.

The judgment was announced here on Thursday by the division bench of the SIndh High Court comprising Justice Zahid Qurban Alavi and Justice Mushir Alam.

The bench had reserved the judgment 14 months ago after hearing more than 100 constitutional petitions/ criminal applications seeking release of hundreds of haris, who were allegedly being held in wrongful confinement by the landlords.

The court had observed at the very outset of hearing of the matters in October 2000 that the phenomenon of bonded haris had developed very recently in Sindh and it must be solved as soon as possible.

The court held that the applications submitted in cases of private detention should be strictly scrutinized, facts should be gone through before issuing notices to persons against whom such allegations were made.

Referring to the disputes arising out of the relationship between the hari and the landlord, the court noted that the matter are be decided by a judicial forum more appropriately by conferring powers of the Tenancy Tribunal on civil judge or judicial magistrate instead of Mukhtiarkar.

With reference to the poor living conditions of haris, the court pointed out that under the STA the peasant is not an ordinary labour or workman within the meaning of Industrial Relation Ordinance but is a partner/co-sharer in the produce with the landlord. Yet a sharp disparity in the living standard exists between hari and landlord.

The bench did not agree with one of the recommendations put forward by one of the lawyers during his arguments that the hari should be referred to as agricultural labour. The court said in this case the government would have to provide enough safeguards through enactments for agricultural labour as they provided for industrial labour.

The court dismissed all the petitions, placed before it keeping in view the recommendations that have been made by the court to bring the STA in conformity with the present day ground realities.

A number of advocates, including Rasool Bux Palijo, represented the applicants whereas Yusuf Leghari and others appeared on behalf of respondents.

The judgment, authored by Justice Zahid Qurban Alavi, spread over 35 pages.

As the ratio of cases, filed before the court reached an alarming level, seeking indulgence of the court, containing similar charges and requesting identical relief (release of hundreds of alleged bonded haris, who were being held in wrongful detention) was sought in all petitions/applications therefore the court consolidated the matters and heard them.