2000 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

The appellant has assailed the order dated 26‑5‑1998 passed by Chairman, Punjab Local Government Board under which he was transferred from office of Chief Officer, Town Committee, Kot Abdul Malik and directed to report to Punjab Local Government Board, Lahore for further posting.

2. The main grievance of the appellant is that he has been transferred, from the office of C.O., Kot Abdul Malik before the completion of his tenure and without any valid grounds. It was also contended that the Anki respondent No.5 who has been posted in his place is not a suitable person as the Administrator, Zila Council; Kasur had made a complaint against him.

3. The respondent‑department in their written statement contended that the appellant was transferred on administrative ground, as there were series of complaints against the appellant made to the Secretary, LG&RD Department.

4. Respondent No.5 denied the allegation against him and contended that he was posted to Town Committee, Kot Abdul Malik in public interest.

5. I have heard the parties and examined the record of the case. It is reported by the respondent‑department that the appellant was transferred from Town Committee, Kot Abdul Malik on the basis of the series of complaints which were made to the Secretary LG&RD Department. It was further, contended that it was actually the appellant who approached the Minister for LG&RD for the cancellation of his transfer and a note was accordingly submitted to him for his order. It was also contended by the learned counsel for the respondent No.5 that the appeal has become infructuous as the order, dated 26‑5‑1998 transferring the appellant from Kot Abdul Malik are no more in the field as subsequently the appellant had been posted as C.O. Municipal Corporation, Narowal vide order 12‑11‑1998.

6. I have considered the arguments of both the parties. It has been categorically stated by the respondent‑department that the appellant was transferred on the basis of a series of complaints. In view of this assertion, the respondent‑department, was quite right in transferring the appellant. As regards the assertion of the appellant that there was a complaint against respondent No.5, it may be stated that it has no bearing on the posting of, respondent No.5 as Chief Officer, Town Committee, Kot Abdul Malik. If he had committed any wrongful act, he would be liable for any such act and the department would obviously take necessary legal action.

7. In view of the circumstances explained above, I do not find any justification for, interference by this Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./573/P.Sr. (Trib.) Appeal dismissed.