Where is the Chief Minister of Balochistan? Where is the provincial leadership when eleven employees belonging to Balochistan, after devoting nearly twenty years of their lives to public service, are left facing an uncertain future? Where is the voice that should rise in their defence, the leadership that should stand beside them, and the authority that should fight for their dignity, livelihood, and legitimate rights? These eleven employees are not merely names on an official file; they are human beings with families to feed, children to educate, dreams to protect, and decades of service behind them. Their livelihoods, family security, and professional futures are at stake. Yet, at a moment when they desperately need the support of their provincial leadership, a deeply troubling question confronts the people of Balochistan: Has their elected leadership forgotten its responsibility towards them?

The Chief Minister is the custodian of the fundamental rights and legitimate entitlements of the people of his province. Protecting their rights is neither an act of charity nor a favour bestowed upon them at the pleasure of those in power; it is a fundamental responsibility of public office. The people elect their representatives to protect their interests, safeguard their rights, and raise their voices whenever they face injustice or administrative high-handedness. They do not elect a Chief Minister to remain a silent spectator while the legitimate grievances of his people go unheard, nor do they elect him merely to indulge in ceremonial engagements and political festivities. The people of Balochistan elected their Chief Minister to govern, to protect, and to deliver justice—not to look the other way when eleven of their own employees face uncertainty after nearly twenty years of service. This is not a demand for a personal favour; it is a demand for the performance of a public duty.

Nearly twenty years of service cannot be dismissed as though they were insignificant. Behind every employee stands a family whose financial security depends upon a regular income. Behind every service record are years of commitment, sacrifice, professional experience, and personal responsibilities. These employees have spent their productive years serving government institutions, building their careers, and planning their families’ futures around their employment.

Now, when their professional future has become uncertain, they deserve answers rather than silence, a workable solution rather than administrative confusion, and responsible leadership rather than indifference. Have the relevant authorities adequately considered the consequences of their repatriation? Have suitable positions been identified in their parent departments? Have their seniority, pay, service continuity, pension entitlements, and other applicable rights been properly protected? If these questions remain unanswered, the matter demands urgent attention from both the federal and provincial governments.

Chief Minister Mir Sarfraz Bugti must recognise that the interests of Balochistan’s employees are an integral part of his government’s responsibility. The fact that these employees have been serving in federal government divisions does not diminish their connection with their province or absolve the provincial government of its duty to consider their legitimate concerns.

A Chief Minister is not merely the head of an administrative machinery. He is the elected political leader expected to represent his province before the federation, defend the legitimate interests of its people, and intervene when administrative decisions threaten to cause avoidable hardship. If eleven employees from Balochistan face uncertainty after nearly two decades of service, what prevents the provincial government from taking up their case with the federal government and the Establishment Division?

Why has an effective solution not been publicly communicated to reassure these employees and their families? Has the provincial government examined their individual circumstances, the availability of suitable positions, and the practical consequences of their repatriation? These are legitimate questions that deserve clear answers.

The Chief Minister should take personal notice of the matter, summon the relevant officials, obtain a complete briefing, and initiate immediate consultations with the federal authorities. If the repatriation decision requires reconsideration, he should make a strong and reasoned case for its review. If repatriation is unavoidable under the applicable rules, he should ensure that a practical arrangement is explored to protect the employees’ lawful service entitlements and prevent unnecessary hardship.

Leadership is not demonstrated by occupying the highest office in the province; it is demonstrated by standing beside ordinary people when their future is at risk.

Balochistan has long faced serious socioeconomic challenges, limited employment opportunities, and concerns about equitable treatment in national affairs. Its people have repeatedly called for greater attention to their legitimate demands, improved opportunities, and meaningful representation in decisions affecting their lives. In this context, the case of eleven employees may appear small in numerical terms, but its implications are far more significant.

When employees from a province already struggling with economic and employment-related challenges face uncertainty, the provincial government should be particularly attentive to their circumstances. The purpose of provincial leadership is not simply to administer departments; it is also to ensure that the legitimate interests of the people are effectively represented.

Every citizen deserves fair treatment, and every public servant deserves to have applicable service rights respected. Employees from Balochistan should not feel that their provincial identity, professional circumstances, or lack of influence places them at a disadvantage when administrative decisions are made.

If these eleven employees are repatriated without suitable arrangements, the consequences will extend beyond the individuals concerned. Their families will bear the anxiety, their professional futures may be disrupted, and public confidence in the responsiveness of the provincial government may suffer.

At a time when national cohesion requires mutual trust and a sense of belonging, the authorities must recognise that fairness in administrative matters is not a minor concern. It is one of the ways in which the state demonstrates that every citizen matters.

One of the most troubling aspects of such situations is the impression that ordinary employees must repeatedly appeal to those in power for relief that should be considered through established administrative and legal processes. The eleven employees should not have to depend upon personal connections, political recommendations, or individual acts of kindness to secure a fair consideration of their case.

Their circumstances should be examined objectively, under the applicable laws, service rules, and administrative policies. Their years of service and professional experience should be taken into account, and any decision affecting their employment should be accompanied by clear reasoning and appropriate arrangements.

No one is arguing that government employees are exempt from administrative rules or that every employee must necessarily remain in the same position indefinitely. The issue is whether a decision affecting employees after nearly twenty years of service has been made and implemented with due consideration for their lawful rights, the availability of suitable positions, and the consequences for their families.

The distinction is fundamental: asking for justice is not asking for a favour, and demanding that public authorities fulfil their responsibilities is not an act of defiance.

Although the provincial leadership has a responsibility to represent the interests of its people, the federal government and the Establishment Division cannot be absolved of their own responsibilities. If these employees have served in federal government divisions for nearly two decades, the authorities responsible for their repatriation must explain the administrative basis of their decision and clarify the arrangements proposed for their future employment.

It is essential to determine whether their parent departments are operational, whether suitable posts are available, and whether their service records and applicable entitlements will be protected. If the relevant departments have been abolished, reorganised, or rendered unable to accommodate these employees, the authorities must examine the legal and administrative options available to them. Such circumstances should be addressed through consultation and a carefully considered plan rather than by transferring the problem from one government to another.

The federal government should also consider whether alternative arrangements are possible within the applicable rules and institutional requirements. The Prime Minister and the relevant federal authorities should encourage an urgent resolution. The objective must be to ensure that an administrative decision does not unnecessarily jeopardise the livelihoods of eleven employees and their families.

The matter should not become a political confrontation between the federation and the province. Both governments have a responsibility to work together in the public interest.

Chief Minister Sahib, the eleven employees of Balochistan are looking towards their provincial leadership for support. Their families are entitled to expect that their concerns will be heard and that their case will receive serious and timely consideration.

This is an opportunity for you to demonstrate that the interests of Balochistan’s people remain a priority for your government. Please take personal notice of their case. Direct the relevant provincial departments to examine their circumstances. Engage with the federal government and the Establishment Division. Seek a review of the decision wherever justified, and ensure that all lawful options for protecting their employment and service entitlements are explored.

Do not allow this matter to languish in official correspondence while eleven families remain anxious about their future. A timely intervention could open the door to a practical solution and reassure the affected employees that their elected leadership has not abandoned them.

The people of Balochistan do not expect their Chief Minister to resolve every problem instantly. They do, however, have a legitimate expectation that he will listen to their grievances, take action within his authority, and hold the relevant institutions accountable for their responsibilities. That is what public service demands. That is what responsible leadership requires.

Ultimately, this issue raises a question far greater than the repatriation of eleven employees. It concerns the meaning of political representation, the responsibility of public office, and the expectations that citizens are entitled to place upon their elected leaders.

When eleven employees face uncertainty after nearly twenty years of service, their case should not be treated as an insignificant administrative matter. When their families fear for their livelihoods, their concerns should not disappear into the corridors of officialdom. And when legitimate questions arise about their future, the provincial government should not leave them wondering whether anyone is prepared to speak on their behalf.

The Chief Minister is the custodian of his people’s legitimate interests. His responsibility is not to grant favours but to ensure that their rights are protected and their grievances receive proper attention. The people elected their representatives to serve them, not to remain distant from their difficulties. They expect leadership that responds to hardship, confronts administrative injustice where it occurs, and pursues practical solutions rather than allowing problems to persist.

The eleven employees of Balochistan deserve a fair hearing. They deserve clarity about their future. They deserve a decision that respects the applicable rules and their legitimate service entitlements. Above all, they deserve to know that their years of service have not been forgotten.

Chief Minister Mir Sarfraz Bugti must now demonstrate through concrete action that the concerns of Balochistan’s employees matter to his government.

Where is the Chief Minister of Balochistan? Where is the leadership these eleven employees desperately need? And when will their legitimate concerns receive the attention they deserve?

These questions cannot be answered by silence. They must be answered through action.

The time for intervention is now.

Dr Alamdar Hussain Malik
Former Financial Adviser, Finance Division, Government of Pakistan