1999 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
ISHFAQ AHMAD Versus MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, PUNJAB, LAHORE and 4 others
| Citation | 1999 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Ihsanul Haq Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | ISHFAQ AHMAD Versus MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, PUNJAB, LAHORE and 4 others |
| Primary Law | Civil service‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Ihsanul Haq Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (ISHFAQ AHMAD Versus MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, PUNJAB, LAHORE and 4 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sharif Khokhar for Petitioner.
- Anwaar Akhtar for Respondent No.3.
- 2. On the other hand, Rana Muhammad Arif, Additional Advocate -General, submits that mother of respondent No.5 moved for his transfer on compassionate grounds. The same was allowed. The case was processed and ultimately the order was passed. It is added that the petitioner manoeuvred his transfer order from Kamokay to Shahdara, Lahore. It is added that the transfer order has been passed at the departmental level, therefore, the writ petition is not competent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑ Transfer ‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Petitioner who was a civil servant had filed Constitutional petition against order of his transfer from one place of working to another‑‑‑Matter of transfer being that of terms and conditions of service, Constitutional petition filed by petitioner, was not maintainable ‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199 &
212. Rana Muhammad Arif, Addl. A.‑G Respondent No.5 in person.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Sharif Khokhar for Petitioner. Anwaar Akhtar for Respondent No.3. Rana Muhammad Arif, Addl. A.‑G Respondent No.5 in person. It is argued that the petitioner has been transferred from Shahdara Lahore to Gujrat. He challenged that order through this Constitutional petition. It is added that the order is illegal, mala fide and result of extraneous influence.
2. On the other hand, Rana Muhammad Arif, Additional Advocate -General, submits that mother of respondent No.5 moved for his transfer on compassionate grounds. The same was allowed. The case was processed and ultimately the order was passed. It is added that the petitioner manoeuvred his transfer order from Kamokay to Shahdara, Lahore. It is added that the transfer order has been passed at the departmental level, therefore, the writ petition is not competent.
3. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. These days anxiety of all civil servants seems to have posting of their own choice and they even do not like slightest disturbance.
4. Be that as it may, the matter is of terms and conditions of service, therefore, the writ petition is not competent and the same is dismissed in limine.