ZIA-UD-DIN KHATTAK, J.--- Dr. Ibadullah, Zilla Nazim, Shangla seeks declaration that the posting/transfer of respondents Nos.5 to 8 vide Notification No,SO(S)4-16/2008/Muhammad Ayub, dated 20-6-2008 and Notification No,SO(S)4-16/2008 Muhammad Roshan Khan, dated 19-6-2008 are without lawful authority and of no legal effect and liable to be set aside.
2. Briefly, facts relevant for disposal of this writ petition are that the respondent No,3 (Provincial Government) issued the impugned notifications whereby respondents Nos.5 to 8 were transferred to various positions in District Shangla. It is alleged that under Schedule-VI of the N.-W.F.P. District Government Rules of Business, 2001 the Provincial Government while proceedings to make posting and transfer of officers in BS-17 and above are under an obligation to consult the District Nazim but the petitioner has not been consulted while issuing the impugned notifications. Dissatisfied, the petitioner has come up to this Court and challenged the posting/transfer order of respondents Nos.5 to 8 in the instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ikramullah Khan, learned Additional Advocate-General and have gone through the available record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued the case at length but has not been able to satisfy this Court, how the petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned posting/transfer orders and whether the same have affected any of his rights. No doubt Rule 25 of the N.-W.F.P. District Government Rules of Business, 2001 read with Schedule-VI thereof required consultation with Zilla Nazim before issuing of the impugned orders but its non-compliance had affected the rights of respondents Nos.5 to 8, if any, and they could be aggrieved persons but they did not challenge their transfer orders before any authority.
5. It is well-settled that the right that could be enforced under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic or Pakistan must ordinarily be right of the petitioner himself, which is personal as well as individual, with the impugned orders issued by the Provincial Government could not be challenged by the petitioner on the ground that it militated against the rules of business, for it could not be said that any personal right of the petitioner had been infringed or his interest had been prejudiced even indirectly by the posting/transfer of respondents Nos.5 to 8. The petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the legality of the impugned orders on behalf of respondents Nos.5 to 8 as the same could only be challenged by the respondents themselves, the affected/ transferred civil servants and no other person. Therefore, the petitioner being not an aggrieved person has no locus standi to challenge the impugned posting orders in the instant petition.
' Further, Rule 18 of the Rules of Business has provided that the District Government shall consult the Law Department before instituting civil proceedings in a Court of law in which the Provincial Government is involved. The District Government under section 13 of the N.-W.F.P. Local Government Ordinance, 2001 is composed of Zilla Nazim etc., who shall sue through District Coordination Officer and further section 4 (ibid) provides that the Local Government shall function within the Provincial framework and adhere to the Federal and Provincial laws and, in performance of its functions, shall not impede or prejudice the exercise of the neither consulted the Law Department before the institution of the instant proceedings nor sued the Provincial Government through the D.C.O. Nor followed the provisions of the Ordinance/rules of Business while challenging the executive authority of the Provincial Government through the instant petition. Therefore, this Court, in view of the petitioner's conduct, would not exercise its discretionary power under Article 199 of the Constitution for the grant of relief prayed for in a petition not competently filed. Moreover, the writ petition has otherwise become infructuous inasmuch as the impugned Notification regarding posting/transfer of respondents Nos.5, 7 and 8 has been withdrawn by the competent authority and respondent No,6 has been adjusted in the same office against a vacant post where he was already working.
6. Consequently, this writ petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed in limine.