SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.- The petitioner through this Constitutional petition, calls in question the order dated 13.12.2004, whereby the petitioner has been directed to be transferred out from Pakpattan Sharif to another Zone.
2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that the petitioner was serving as Income Tax Inspector at Pakpattan Sharif. A dispute arose between the petitioner, his colleagues and respondent No. 5, who filed various applications/complaints against the petitioner to different functionaries as also to the Federal Tax Ombudsman, which were consigned to record. The Federal Tax Ombudsman observed that the petitioner be posted out in the same manner as Rao Abdul Qayyum, Income Tax Inspector. The petitioner filed representation under Section 32 of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 before the President of Pakistan, through proper channel, against the findings of Federal Tax Ombudsman in Complaint No. 419 of 2004, which was duly forwarded by the Regional Commissioner to Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad for onward transmission to the Honourable President of Pakistan which is still pending before him.
3. The observation of the Federal Tax Ombudsman is to transfer the petitioner from his present place of posting to another Zone, as his real brother is a practicing Advocate in the said District.
This observation has been impugned in the Constitutional jurisdiction that Federal Tax Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to pass this order.
4. Federal Tax Ombudsman exercise quasi- judicial jurisdiction. Maladministration in the Central Board of Revenue or any of its establishment can be taken notice of by Federal Tax Ombudsman.
The petitioner is a civil servant. Direction to transfer him outside the home District is squarely covered by terms and conditions of his service. Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Public of Pakistan, 1973 imposes complete bar to entertain Constitutional petitions. Besides, the petitioner has already availed an adequate remedy by filing a representation before the President of Pakistan under Section 32 of the Establishment of the Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000. In this view of the matter, even on this ground, the Constitutional petition is not entertainable.
5. For what has been discussed above, this Constitutional petition is dismissed in limine alongwith all other accompanied civil miscellaneous petitions. However, it is observed that the petitioner may seek his remedy from the Federal Service Tribunal, if so advised.