1. IMAM BUX BALOCH, J.--- The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners Nos.1 and 2 are working as computer operators cum Junior Clerks since 2004 and petitioners Nos.3 and 4 since 2005, while petitioner No,5 since 2006 on daily wages basis in the Revenue Group of Offices, District Larkana. It is further stated that petitioner No, 1 was firstly appointed on 4-9-2004 vide Order No,Esst/3205 and petitioner No,2 was appointed on 9-10-2004 vide Order No, 3/Admn/Rev as Junior Clerk on daily wages at the rate of Rs,140 per day. It is further case of the petitioner that petitioners Nos.1 and 2 were verbally told that their services are terminated by Zila Nazim, Larkana, vide order dated 22-10- 2005, but they were asked to continue work on their respective posts, as they have submitted summary on direction of respondent No,2 for their fresh appointments which was approved by the respondent No,
1. It is further stated that petitioners No, 1 and 2 were reappointed and petitioners Nos.3 and 4 were appointed by respondent No, 4, as daily wages employees in Revenue Group of offices District Larkana w.e.f, 23-10-2005, vide office orders No,EDO (R)/E.B. (DWS), 35 of 2006, dated 13-1-2006. Petitioner No,5 was appointed as Junior Clerk on daily wages at the rate of Rs,140 per day by the respondent No,4 in the Revenue Group of Offices, District Larkana, w.e.f, 13-1-2006, vide Order No,EDO (R)/EB (DWS) 36 of 2006 dated 13-1-2006. It is further case of the petitioners that they are working on daily wages basis against the permanent vacant posts without any break or interval continuously and have accrued right to be regularized on the posts on which they are serving since their date of appointment. The petitioners further stated that petitioners Nos.1 to 4 moved application to the Senior Member Board of Revenue, Sindh Hyderabad through proper channel, through respondent No,4 for their regularization against the vacant posts in the department, and their applications were forwarded by the competent authority through letter No,EB/3409, dated 7-12-2006, for their regularization against vacant posts. On 7-12-2006, the respondent No,4, Assistant Secretary Board of Revenue Sindh Hyderabad, vide Letter No,4/934/2006 Admn. 111/443, dated 27-4-2007, addressed to the respondent No,3 has given clarification regarding the regularization of the petitioners, which letter reads as under:-- "Since under the devolution plan District Government is competent/empowered to decide such cases of officials from BPS-1 to BPS 15 at District level as in case of identical nature of Mr. 'Illahi Bux alias Tariq Hussain and two others."
2. ' It is further case of the petitioners that after receiving clarification furnished by Board of Revenue, Sindh, the respondent No,4 flouted summary to respondent No, 3 for regularization of petitioners on their satisfactory work, efficiency and honestly against permanent/vacant posts, on which they are working for more than five years, but the same was not taken into consideration. It is further case of the petitioners that they have moved such applications to the competent authority for their regularization but the competent authority have not considered the request of the petitioners, hence the petitioners filed instant petition with the following prayer:--- "To direct the respondents Nos.2 to 4 to regularize the services of the petitioners against permanent/vacant posts on which they are working"
3. ' The respondents Nos.2 and 4 have filed their parawise comments. In their comments, the respondents have admitted that the petitioners have been appointed on daily wages. The respondent No,2 have not denied the fact that the petitioners have not been appointed as stated by the petitioners in the petition.
4. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate-General and perused the relevant record. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that the petitioners are low paid employees and they are working honestly to the satisfaction of their superiors and no any compliant whatsoever is against them. He further contended that the respondents Nos.2 and 4 have admitted that the petitioners are working on daily wages since last more than five years against the permanent vacant posts. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an unreported order of this Court, passed in C.P. No, D-1194 of 2009 (Mustafa Hussain and others v. Province of Sindh and others) and contended that this Court has already granted relief to the petitioners in the similar circumstances. He further contended that the case of the petitioners is identical to the case of petitioners in C.P. No,D-1194 of 2009.
5. ' On the other hand learned Additional Advocate-General contended that the petitioners are working on daily wages and the respondents are not obliged to regularize their services as the petitioners have admitted the terms and conditions of temporary appointments.
6. ' Having heard the learned counsel for respective parties and with their assistance we have gone through the material available on record.
7. ' In C.P. No, D-1194 of 2009 this Court has granted relief to the petitioners and one of us (Mr. Justice Imam Bux Baloch), was the member of the Bench. This Court after relying on similar petition vide No, C.P. No,D-901 of 2009 passed by Circuit Court, Hyderabad, of this Court and the EDO was directed to appoint/regularize contingent staff including petitioners on regular basis as they are low paid servants and are entitled to be appointed as such.
8. Relying on the above judgments passed in two petitions, we allow this petition, with direction to E.D.O. (Revenue), Larkana, to regularize the services of the petitioners on the posts, on which they are working within one week. By our short order dated 25-5-2010, this petition was allowed and these are the reasons for the same.