2011 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.

The petitioners are aggrieved by the Notification dated 13-2-2010 which re-designate/re-locate into two establishments work of Director-General Audit Works (Provincial) and the Director-General Audit Works (Federal). The criteria for allocation of officers to bifurcated establishments has been laid down in the notification. The petitioners' claim that the said criteria has been misapplied by their allocation to the new office at Islamabad. The petitioners, filed a representation before respondent No.1, Auditor-General of Pakistan which was disposed of vide order dated 2-4-2010. This order fails to answer the grievance of the petitioners and mentions an interim arrangement as the ground for denying existence of any grievance of the petitioners.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order dated 2-4-2010 fails to decide the petitioners' representation in particular the plea that the services of the petitioners have been re-located rather than transferred. As a result the petitioners are prejudiced, no departmental view is expressed on the plea taken by him.

3. The learned Deputy Attorney-General submits that the impugned notification operates as a transfer order and the present petition is not maintainable. He is supported by the contention in this behalf for counsel for respondents Nos.4 and 5.

4. The impugned notification and the order dated 2-4-2010 have been perused. Prima facie the petitioners' services have been allocated to a new establishment at Islamabad after bifurcation of the one at Lahore. However, whether allocation of the staff to the new establishment is in accordance with the terms of criteria laid down in the notification dated 13-2-2010 still needs to be decided by respondent No.l. The order dated 2-4-2010 merely relies on an interim arrangement which can be reversed at any time to detrimentally affect the petitioners' service rights. To the mind of this court the respondent No.1 as a public functionary is under a duty to decide the points raised in the petitioners' representation fairly and transparently. Whilst relying on Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary Sindh, Karachi and 4 others v. Gul Muhammad Hajano (2003 SCMR 325) it is directed that respondent No.1 shall consider and decide afresh the petitioners' representation in accordance with law for reasons, that are stated in writing. He shall do so expeditiously. Meanwhile the status quo shall be maintained vis-a-vis the officers who are party to this petition. Petition disposed of. H.B.T./K-12/L Order accordingly.