1997SCMR 167 (PLP)

(On appeal from the order dated 3‑7‑1996 passed by the Lahore High Court in C.M. No.2‑1996 in W.P. No. 8213/1996). ‑‑‑‑S.9‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts .199, 212 & 185‑‑‑Civil servant‑‑ Transfer‑‑‑High Court while admitting civil servant's Constitutional petition against transfer suspended his transfer order‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Both petitioner and respondent were admittedly civil servants‑‑‑Dispute between both civil servants related to their transfer/posting, which was a matter relatable to terms and conditions of their service‑‑‑Disputes about such matters would fall within exclusive jurisdiction of Service Tribunal while jurisdiction of High Court was excluded in such matters in terms of express provisions of Art. 212(2) of the Constitution‑‑‑High Court apparently had not attended to such aspect of matter before issuing stay order‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed‑‑‑High Court impugned stay order was set aside and it was directed that High Court should first decide question of its jurisdiction before passing any stay order. Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Walayat Umer Ch., Advocate‑on‑Record for the Caveator. Date of hearing: 20th November, 1996. ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.‑‑‑Respondent No. 3 herein was posted as Assistant Education Officer (W), Markaz Narowal, when by order dated 6‑2‑1996, passed by the Director of Education (EE), Gujranwala Division, she was transferred and posted as SST/HM at Government Girls Middle School, Chandar‑Ke‑Rajpootan vice the petitioner who in turn was posted as Assistant Education Officer (W), Markaz Narowal. Respondent after approaching the higher authorities in the Education Department filed a Constitutional petition in the Lahore High Court to challenge the aforementioned order of her transfer on the ground, inter alia, that the present petitioner was not eligible to be posted as Assistant Education Officer by using the political influence of a Special Assistant to the Chief Minister. 'Learned Judge in the High Court vide order dated 3‑7‑1996 admitted the writ petition to regular hearing and suspended the operation of the impugned transfer order. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court to seek leave to appeal against the stay order issued by the High Court.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Both the petitioner and respondent No. 1 are admittedly civil servants. Dispute between them relates to their transfer/posting which is a matter relatable to the terms and conditions of their service. Disputes about these matters fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal and the jurisdiction of the High Court is excluded in such matters by virtue of the express provisions .of Article 212(2) of the Constitution. It appears that the learned Judge in the High Court has not duly attended to this aspect of the matter before issuing the stay order. In the circumstances, we convert this petition into an appeal and allow it. The impugned stay order is set aside and it is directed that the High Court should first decide the question of its jurisdiction before passing any stay order. A.A./M‑3304/S Case remanded.