This order shall dispose of Writ Petition No, 9020 of 2006 filed by the petitioner to assail the validity of order dated 12.8.2006 whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of TMO Ferozwala and directed to report to S&GAD and the order dated 15.8.2006 whereby Respondent No, 3 has been posted as TMO Ferozwala.
2. Facts in brief giving rise to the filing of this Constitutional Petition are that petitioner was originally working as Assistant Director Revenue Recovery, NTC Lahore Region under the Federal Government.
On 22.2.2006, the Government of Punjab expressed its intention to utilize petitioner's services and request in this behalf was made to the Secretary Establishment to the Government of Pakistan and vide notification dated 6.3.2006, petitioner's services stood transferred to the Punjab Government on deputation. On 8.4.2006 services of the petitioner were placed at the disposal of the Local Government & Rural Development Department Punjab for his further posting. On 17.4.2006, petitioner was appointed as TMO. Ferozwala. One Ch. Azhar Hussain, in whose place petitioner had been appointed, challenged petitioner's appointment before this Court through Writ Petition No, 3673 of 2006 contending that petitioner being originally an employee of the NTC could not have been appointed as TMO. After hearing both parties, this Court accepted the said constitutional petition by mean of order dated 25.5.2006 holding that petitioner could not be posted as or hold the post of TMO under the rules and his appointment order was set aside. Being aggrieved, petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of the Apex Court by filing CPLA No, 918 of 2006 which was allowed in the following term: "At the outset learned Assistant Advocate General Punjab appearing for Respondents No, 1 & 2 as well as learned AOR for the Respondent No, 3 have stated that they would have no objection if the impugned judgment dated 25.5.2006 is set aside and the Writ Petition No, 3673/2006 filed by. the Respondent No, 3 before the Lahore High Court Lahore is dismissed. They have further stated that the Respondent No, 3 is being Posted elsewhere."
3. In this view of the matter, this appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment dated 25.5.2006 passed by the Lahore High Court Lahore is set aside. Consequently, the Writ Petition No, 3673-2006 shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs."
4. Thereafter, vide order dated 12.8.2006 petitioner was transferred from the post of TMO Ferozwala and directed to report to S&GAD Punjab and subsequently vide order dated 15.8.2006, Respondent No, 3 was transferred and posted as TMO Ferozwala. Both the above referred orders are being impugned herein.
5. Counsels for the parties and the learned Addl. AG have been heard and comments furnished in the case perused.
6. It is being canvassed by the learned counsel that impugned orders are mala fide and in violation of the present policy of the Government. Adds that said orders have been passed for extraneous reasons and 'the respondents have no jurisdiction to transfer the petitioner.
7. Whereas learned counsel for the respondents and the learned Addl. AG controvert the contentions as raised on behalf of the petitioner. Further contends that petitioner's initial appointment was illegal as has been held by this Court and the order of the Apex Court did not validate his appointment. It is further contended that petitioner had failed to carry out his duties in accordance with law resulting in serious mismanagement necessitating his transfer.
8. Admittedly, petitioner is an employee of the NTC. His very appointment as TMO Ferozwala is not free from doubt. Furthermore, record reveals that serious dispute arose as to the approval of the budget of TMA Ferozwala. Complaints in this behalf had come on the surface and the Chief Minister of Punjab directed a probe into the matter and deputed DG (Inspection) Local Govt. to submit a report regarding meeting in which the budget was allegedly approved. With reference to the present petitioner, said report indicates that: "Similarly the TMO has proved himself to be inefficient by not preparing the annual budget according to the rules and was involved in the illegal activities."
In pursuance of the aforesaid report it was suggested that Secretary LG&RD should take disciplinary action against the petitioner and the latter should be repatriated to his parent department. A summary in this behalf was transmitted to the Chief Minister Punjab and it was directed that since the petitioner has been directed to report to his parent department which may be asked to take up the charges against.
10. In the above perspective this Court is not persuaded to interfere in the matter in its equitable jurisdiction. Even otherwise action of the respondents does not appear to be arbitrary and mala fide and appears to be in consonance with the dictates of good governance. Additionally, no civil servant or functionary, of the State can claim any vested right for being posted at any particular post of his own choice and is bound to abide by the terms and conditions of his service including transfer and posting.
For the above mentioned facts and reasons, no case for interference and invalidation of the impugned orders has been made out and this petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed accordingly.