Govt told to explain delay in unfreezing SHC staffers’ judicial allowance

The Sindh High Court (SHC) directed the chief, finance and law secretaries on Wednesday to appear before it and file statements on a petition of high court employees asking that an order be issued to the provincial government to notify a former chief justice’s directive for unfreezing a special judicial allowance for all cadres of officers and staff of high the court and subordinate courts with effect from July 1, 2016.

Mohammad Nusrat Ali and others submitted in the petition that the SHC registrar had on December 7, 2016, sent a letter to the law department for notifying the then high court chief justice’s directive for unfreezing the special judicial allowance.

They said the acting law secretary moved a summary on January 20, 2017, to the chief minister through the finance secretary, who sought a legal opinion of the advocate general, but despite the advocate general’s giving his opinion, no notification had been issued by the government till the filing of the petition.

They stated that such delaying acts on the part of the government, including the chief secretary and the finance secretary, showed that they were not notifying the direction of the then former chief justice who was a fully competent authority in view of rules 15 and 17 of the Sindh High Court Establishment (appointment and conditions of service) Rules 2006.

According to the petitioners, the act of omission, obstruction or even delay in the implementation of the letter issued by the SHC amounts to interference with the affairs of the judiciary and may be deemed as a willful and deliberate contempt of the high court as well as of the Supreme Court.

Citing the SHC registrar, the chief minister through the chief secretary, the finance secretary and the law secretary as respondents, the court was requested to direct the government to notify the direction for unfreezing the special judicial allowance for all the cadres of the officers and staffers of the SHC, and judicial officers and staff of the district and civil courts with effect from July 1, 2016 without any delay.

The hearing of the case could not be taken up due to the absence of the chief secretary, who was reported to be unwell. The court by consent adjourned the matter till April 24 after issuing directions to the respondents to appear and submit their replies.