1994 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

‑‑‑‑Transfer‑‑‑Challenge to‑‑‑Employee who had challenged his last transfer order, within a span of less than 8 months was transferred five times at different places and stations; but none of those tra6sfer orders was passed in exigencies of service or for administrative reasons‑‑‑Each transfer order was manoeuvred/manipulated by employees concerned by using political influence of some M.P.As. or Minister and in that activity employee who had challenged his last transfer was not lagging behind as he managed his earlier transfers on recommendations of Minister and M.P.As.‑‑‑Such conduct of employee would not entitle him to complain that his transfers were to accommodate officers of choice of Minister arid M.P‑As.

Coda declined`1ti'fiterfere‑with order of transfer in circumstances. M. Anwar Sipra for petitioner. Rana Muhammad Arshad, Addl A. G for respondent No

1. Hakam Qureshi for Respondent No.

2. Petitioner was posted as S.D.O. in Provincial Building Sub‑Division, Khanpur and he had not yet completed his normal tenure, at that station (he had in fact served there for only one year, and three months) when by, order, dated 24‑3‑1991 (Annexure `A'), he was transferred to Lahore and posted as Construction Sub‑Division vice Ijaz Ahmed, who was transferred and posted as Assistant Engineer. Quality Control 1st. P.B. Circle, Lahore. It is pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate-General that the petitioner's transfer to Lahore was made at his own request and on the recommendation of Mr. Aslam Bharwana, a Provincial Minister: This is not denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Be that as it may, on 31‑7‑1991, vide order Annexure B', petitioner was transferred from Construction Sub‑Division and posted as Assistant Design Officer in Highway Department, Lahore and Khurshid Alam, S.D.O. was transferred from Chakwal and posted in Road Construction Sub Division, Lahore in place of petitioner. It is stated that the record shows that the order Annexure `B' was passed on the direction of .the Minister of Communication and Works: Department; Government of Punjab to accommodate Khurshid Alam, S.D.O. Petitioner, it appears, did not accept his transfer and posting as Assistant Design Officer in the Highway Department, Lahore and he managed his transfer and posting as S.D.O. in Highway Sub Division, Chiniot, vice Arshad Mahmood‑ul‑Hassan Chughtai, S.D.O. who was transferred to Lahore and posted as Assistant Design Officer, Highway Department. This was vide order dated 17‑8‑1991 which, it is stated, was passed on the recommendation of four MPAs including Mehr Aslam Bharwana, Advisor to Chief Minister. Petitioner took over in Chiniot on 21‑8‑1991 but after about two months; vide order,' dated 27‑10‑1991, he was transferred to Highway Sub‑Division, Kamalia vice Israr Ahmad, S.D.O. This order, according to the record, was passed on the direction of the Minister for Communication and Works who wanted respondent No. 2 to be posted in Chiniot. Order dated 27‑10‑1991 was also modified on 17‑11‑1991 and the petitioner was transferred to Lodhran. It is stated that this modification was made on the recommendation of Mr. Riaz Fatyana, MPA who wanted Israr Ahmad, S.D.O. to continue at Kamalia who accordingly remained posted at Kamalia. Thus, within a span of less than 8 months, as many as five orders of transfer and posting were passed in respect of the petitioner and none of these orders was pas‑ed in the exigencies of service or for administrative reasons. Each order, it appears, was manoeuvred/manipulated by the SDOs concerned by using political influence of some MPAs or the Minister and in this activity, petitioner was not lagging behind. In fact, he managed his transfer from Khanpur to Lahore on the recommendation of the Minister for C & W and again he got his posting in the Highway Sub‑Division, Chiniot on the recommendation of four MPAs. In view of this conduct of the petitioner, it does not lie in his mouth to complain that the orders of his transfer to Kamalia and then to Lodhran were made to accommodate the officers of the choice of the Minister and the MPAs. In the circumstances, I do not feel inclined to interfere with the impugned orders of transfer in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction in writ. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed in limine.

2. Before parting with the case, I would like to observe that the instant case brings into sharp focus a highly regrettable state of affairs where the Government servants have manoeuvred their transfers to the stations of their choice by using political influence and the administrative head/competent authority has only acted mechanically and passed orders of transfer/posting on the recommendations of the MPAs or the Minister without applying his own independent mind to the question whether the transfer/posting was at all called for on administrative grounds. It is high time that the administrative heads realise their obligation to act in accordance with law and only in accordance with law in the performance of their official duties/functions and not to be swayed by any political influence brought to bear on them.

3. A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Minister, Punjab, for information and also to the Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, for initiating disciplinary proceedings against the SDOs concerned who have used political influence for obtaining their transfers/postings to the stations of their choice. H.B.T./M‑1162/L Petition dismissed.