KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has summoned the establishment secretary for not implementing its earlier orders about the proforma promotion of a BS-21 Customs officer to BS-22.

A two-judge constitutional bench of the SHC headed by Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon also directed the secretary to satisfy it as to why contempt proceedings may not be initiated against him.

It noted that despite clear and repeated directions issued by the SHC, duly affirmed by the Supreme Court, the respondents have not shown meaningful compliance, but persisted in adopting a stance already rejected by the court through earlier orders.

Razia Sultana Tahir, through her lawyer, had filed an application last year seeking contempt proceedings against the secretary of the establishment division and other alleged contemnors for not complying with an order passed by the SHC in 2018 about her proforma promotion.

Petitioner Razia Sultana seeks contempt proceedings over non-compliance of SHC order regarding her promotion to BS-22

Initially, she had petitioned the SHC in 2017 and submitted that the petitioner had served the Pakistan Customs department for around 33 years and stood retired in BPS-21 upon attaining the age of superannuation in January 2013.

She also argued that during her service tenure, she was promoted to BPS-21 with effect from October 2005 and her further promotion to BS-22 was due in 2012 as per law, but it was denied by respondents compelling her to file an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal, which was allowed with certain directions to respondents and the Supreme Court had also upheld the same as respondents had challenged the same before it.

In 2018, the SHC had also remanded the matter back to respondents with a direction to pass a fresh decision without discrimination on proforma promotion of the petitioner along with allied benefits in accordance with law within two months and later the Supreme Court had also maintained such order.

In October last year, the high court had granted the alleged contemnors/competent authority the last opportunity to comply with directions of SHC as well as the Supreme Court in the matter without fail within one month and also sought a compliance report.

When the matter came up for hearing before the constitutional bench of the SHC, the counsel for the petitioner argued that the alleged contemnors have been willfully and deliberately flouting the court orders.

A deputy secretary of the establishment division filed an interim compliance report stating that the high-powered selection board was scheduled to be held on April 27 and the case of the petitioner will also be considered.

The bench noted that similar pleas taken earlier by the respondents were already considered and rejected by the SHC and had also directed respondents to process the case in question by circulation rather than through a high-powered selection board.

“In view of the above circumstances, it appears that despite clear and repeated directions of this Court, duly affirmed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the respondents have not shown meaningful compliance and have rather persisted in adopting a stance already considered and rejected by this Court through earlier orders dated 02.10.2025 and 06.11.2025”, it added.

The bench also said that the repeated deviation from the specific directives apparently reflected the non-seriousness of respondents/alleged contemnors in the implementation of judicial mandates.

“In these circumstances, this Court considers it appropriate to require the personal appearance of the Secretary Establishment Division, Government of Pakistan, to explain the reasons for non-compliance and to satisfy the court as to why proceedings under the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, may not be initiated against him”, it added.

It further warned that in case of failure to appear or satisfactory explanation, the SHC may be constrained to take further appropriate action in accordance with law, including initiation of contempt proceedings and directing a competent authority to consider disciplinary action against the delinquent officer.

Published in Dawn, May 2nd, 2026