SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
 
 
 
Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, CJ 
 
 
 
Mr. Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CIVIL PETITIONS NO.590, 671 AND 696 OF 2021 
 
[Against the order dated 19.1.2021, passed by the High Court 
of Sindh, Karachi, in C.P. No.D-2839 of 2017 
 
 
 
CP.590 of 2021 
Shahzad Shahmir and others Vs. 
Government of Sindh through Chief 
Secretary, 
Sindh 
Secretariat, 
Karachi and others 
 
 
CP.671 of 2021 
Arshad Mehmood and others Vs. 
Government of Sindh through Chief 
Secretary, Karachi and another 
 
 
CP.696 of 2021 
Muhammad Rizwan and others 
Vs. Muhammad Azim and others 
 
 
 
For the Petitioners 
: Mr. Muhammad Shoaib Shaheen, 
ASC  
(in CP.590 of 2021) 
Mr. Rafiq Ahmed Kalwar, ASC 
(in CP.671 of 2021) 
Mr. Shahab Sarki, ASC 
(in CP.696 of 2021) 
 
  
Respondents 
: N.R. 
(in all cases) 
 
  
Date of Hearing 
: 12.04.2021 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
GULZAR 
AHMED, 
CJ.- 
An 
Agreement 
dated 
28.11.2014, was made between the International Development 
Association (IDA) and the Province of Sindh, called as “Project 
Agreement”. Clause 8 of the Project Agreement has provided that 
the Project Development Objective is to raise school participation 
by 
improving 
sector 
governance 
and 
accountability, 
and 
strengthening 
administrative 
systems, 
measure 
student 
CP.590 of 2021, etc. 
- 2 - 
 
 
 
achievement, and the project supports the Sindh Government’s 
Second Sindh Education Sector Reform Project (SERP-II). The total 
cost of the project SERP-II is US $2600 million for which the 
Sindh Government’s financing/share is US $2200 million and 
remaining US $400 million is financed by the World Bank. The 
period for the implementation of SERP-II was 2013-17.  
2. 
 
It seems that the Sindh Government has proceeded to 
implement the SERP-II with the project cost of US $2600 million 
in which Singh Government’s own financing/share was US $2200 
million and remaining US $400 million was financed by the World 
Bank. Various appointments for implementation of the Project 
Agreement seem to have been made by the Government of Sindh 
and the petitioners were also appointed by the Government of 
Sindh for the implementation of the Project Agreement. The very 
appointments, made for the Project Agreement, seems to have 
come up in the High Court of Sindh at Karachi in C.P. No.D-2839 
of 2017, where the High Court gave judgment dated 21.05.2018 
noting that process of recruitment of Headmaster/Headmistress 
(BPS-17) initiated by the Government of Sindh was required to be 
scrutinized and the report was called. Report dated 13.11.2020 
was submitted by the Government of Sindh in which it was found 
that the appointees did not possess qualification, experience and 
their age was also not in accordance with law, and the 
applications for appointment to these posts were obtained even 
after terminal date for submission of the applications.   
3. 
 
The petitioners seem to have been employed in the 
project to the posts of Headmaster/Headmistress in BPS-17 on 
CP.590 of 2021, etc. 
- 3 - 
 
 
 
two years’ contract from 12.07.2017. First thing that is to be 
noted that the very project was for the period 2013-17, how the 
appointments of the petitioners were made on 12.07.2017 on 
contract basis when apparently the project itself has ended. We 
have asked the learned counsel for the petitioners as to whether 
the project initiated through Agreement dated 28.11.2014, is 
continuing, he stated that there is no continuation of the project. 
The learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that the 
project has not been taken over by the Singh Government on non-
development side of its Budget.  
4. 
 
This very fact that the project in which the petitioners 
are alleged to have been appointed is no more in existence and 
such project having not been taken over by the Sindh Government 
on the non-development side, we are unable to understand as to 
how 
the 
petitioners 
were 
appointed 
on 
the 
posts 
of 
Headmasters/Headmistresses in BPS-17 when the very project 
was not in existence.  
5. 
 
Be that as it may, the very appointments in BPS-17, as 
per law, made under Article 242 of the Constitution, have to be 
made by the Sindh Public Service Commission (SPSC) and no 
contract employment could have been made on such posts. Thus, 
the appointments of the petitioners, as observed by the High 
Court of Sindh, Karachi (the High Court) in its impugned order, 
were on their very face illegal and, therefore, in our view, no right 
whatsoever existed with the petitioners to continue with the 
employment, more so, when the very contract appointments were 
not in accordance with law.  
CP.590 of 2021, etc. 
- 4 - 
 
 
 
6. 
 
Be that as it may, the High Court has given certain 
directions in its impugned order dated 19.01.2021 extending some 
benefits to the petitioners, though we note that such entitlement 
to the benefits, apparently, was not available to the petitioners.  
7. 
 
In view of the above, we find no merit in these 
petitions, which are dismissed and leave refused.  
 
 
   
 
 
CHIEF JUSTICE 
 
 
 
Bench-I 
 
Islamabad 
12.04.2021 
‘NOT APPROVED FOR REPORTING’ 
Mahtab/* 
JUDGE 
 
