1. ' MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.---The petitioner has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction seeking declaration that the appointment by way of transfer on deputation of the respondent No,3, be declared illegal liable to be cancelled.
2. ' Succinctly, the facts leading to the petition are that petitioner was appointed as Research Officer (BPS-17) in Animal Quarantine Department, Islamabad, transferred as Veterinary Officer at Karachi vide Notification dated 30-1-1994. It is averred that per notification dated 17-1-1988, the respondent No,1 under Sub-rule (2) of Rule-3 of the Civil Servant (Appointment, Promotion and Transfer) Rules, 1973, laid down qualifications, conditions and methods for appointment against the post in the Animal Quarantine Department under the Federal Government on regular basis. 50% of the posts of Quarantine Officers (BPS-18) were to be filled through direct recruitment and the remaining 50% through promotion from amongst Veterinary Officers and Research Officers in BPS-17. If suitable persons qualified for promotion were not available, the posts against their quota could be filled through direct recruitment or on deputation. It is contended that 9 posts of Quarantine Officer, became available and respondents Nos.1 and 2 filled up four vacancies through direct recruitment.
3. The remaining vacancies were required to be filled up by promotion and the posts were lying vacant on account of the failure by the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to hold .Meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee, despite the fact that the Federal Services Tribunal had resolved the dispute relating to the seniority. During the course of the above exercise, the respondent No,1 had appointed respondent No,3, an employee of Province of Punjab on deputation for three years to serve under the respondent No,2 at Karachi in flagrant violation of the law and the government policy. The impugned notification relating to the appointment of respondent No,3 being violative of law, is liable to be cancelled. The petitioner being aggrieved, has resorted to file the petition.
4. ' The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the respondents Nos.1 and 2 had flouted the condition for promotion laid down per policy of Government of Pakistan Ministry of Food Agriculture and Cooperative (Live Stock Division) for appointment of Quarantine Officers in BPS-18. The respondent No,3 was serving in Live Stock Department, Province of Punjab and his services were lent to the respondent No,1 for posting on deputation in flagrant violation of the conditions for promotion. Instead of posting the respondent No,3 on deputation, the respondents Nos.1 and 2 were bound to hold meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee to fill up the vacant posts. It is next contended that respondent No,3 did not qualify for appointment being an employee of the Provincial Government the rights of the petitioner have been usurped.
5. ' During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not specifically point out any illegality in the posting and appointment of the respondent No,3. Under the law, a civil servant of the Province could always be deputed to service under the Respondent No,1 and vice versa. There is nothing on record to show how he was deficient in terms of the prescribed qualification. The posting of a civil servant against a particular post is discretionary and fell within the domain of the Government. It A settled law that the discretion in service matters should not be exercised by the respondent No,1 in arbitrary or fanciful manner, but only according to law in the interest good governance. In support thereof reliance is placed on Mir Shah Nawaz Marri, Ex- Director, Mineral Development v. Government of Balochistan (2000 PLC Quetta (C.S.) 533). The petitioner being a private person was required to that the burden that the respondent No,3 lacked qualifications for the office assigned to him. Nevertheless copy of the impugned notification filed by the petitioner itself specifies, that the respondent No,3 was serving in BPS-18 possessed qualification for posting on the subject post and was appointed on deputation on the same terms and conditions. Moerover, it is an admitted position that the petitioner and the respondent No,3 are civil servant, for their transfer, postings are relateable to the terms and conditions of service could not be challenged by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, the matter would fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of appropriate Service Tribunal on account of the bar under Article 212(2) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Reliance could be placed on the case of Miss Rukhsana Ijaz Secretary, Education, Punjab (1997 SCM R 167) and Ayyaz Anjum v. Government of Punjab, Housing and Physical Planning Department (1997 PLC C.S. 123), Muaeem Khan v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2000 Peshawar 1).
6. ' In the result, we are of the view that the petition is devoid of merits, hereby stands dismissed.
7. ' These are the reasons, relating to short order dated 22-3-2006, whereby petition was dismissed.