' HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.--- The backdrop of this writ petition is that the petitioner while performing duties as Senior Headmaster Government Public High School No,1 Gujrat in BS-19, received complaints from different quarters against Tariq Farooq EST of the School, containing severe allegations and after examining the same he submitted his report to the District Education Officer, Gujrat. The petitioner's report was based on some enquiry wherein said Tariq Farooq conceded some of the allegations and alleged against Muhammad Munir Chughtai EST of the said School in the same manner. Munir Chughtai is President of Punjab Teachers Union District Gujrat and according to the petitioners he is not interested in performing his duties rather habitual absentee and when directed to perform his duties, he always shows resentment. This very situation was also brought into the notice of District Education Officer (SE), Gujrat by the petitioner who wrote a letter to EDO Education, Gujrat on 20-2-2008 requesting the transfer of said Munir Chughtai.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said Munir Chughtai, as a counterblast levelled false and frivolous allegations against the petitioner. District Education Officer (SE), Gujrat appointed Principal Government College for Elementary Teacher as enquiry officer, who after thorough probe found the said allegations baseless and submitted his findings, but on political pressure of Munir Chughtai, the petitioner became a victim of transfer order from- Government Public High School No,1, Gujrat to Government High School, Shadiwal Gujrat.
' Further submits that the impugned transfer order, which otherwise is based on mala fide, was passed during the ban imposed by the Government of Punjab dated 10-6-2008. Adds that respondent No,5 who is an officer of BS-17 is posted against the petitioner's place of posting where only a BS-19 officer could be posted and respondent No,5's posting itself reveals the arbitrariness and mala fide of respondent No,1 .
3. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate-General submits that transfer being a matter relating to the terms and conditions of service of civil servant, cannot be agitated before this Court in view of bar of Article 212 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Further submits that if the petitioner felt aggrieved of the order of the departmental authority, he has a right to agitate before the high-ups through departmental appeal/ representation which otherwise is an efficacious and alternate remedy. Adds that the allegations levelled in the writ petition could be resolved only by the departmental authorities and being the present case of a factual controversy, cannot be made a subject of writ petition.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. In transfer matters of course the remedy for the aggrieved civil servants lie before the Service Tribunal and for that the aggrieved civil servants have to file departmental appeal/representation within 30 days of the issuance of transfer order and then they have to wait for a period of 90 days or to wait till the disposal of departmental representation before invoking the jurisdiction of service Tribunal, meaning thereby that the aggrieved civil servant can knock the door of Service Tribunal only after a lapse of certain periods and fulfillment of condition of departmental appeal/representation, whereas for that very particular period the petitioner cannot be left remediless, provided the aggrieved person has a genuine claim which could be established through some documentary evidence like:--
(i) Transfer order' passed not in the exigency of service but on directions of some MPA/MNA/Minister.
(ii) The civil servant is made a rolling stone by way of frequent transfer within days/weeks.
(iii) If the aggrieved person is going to be superannuated in a year or so but he is dislocated from his place of posting without any cogent reason like complaint etc. Against him and that too without enquiring into the said allegations.
6. In such-like situation the aggrieved civil servant can approach this Court invoking the provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan and this Court can come to his rescue but to the extent of directing the concerned authorities to examine the matter in its true perspective, hear the petitioner and the other aggrieved person and then decide afresh within a stipulated time and till then the aggrieved civil servant be not disturbed or against him no adverse order' be passed.
7. In arriving at this conclusion, reliance can safely be placed on a recent judgment reported as Secretary Revenue Division v. Muhammad Saleem 2008 SCM R 948, wherein the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan categorically held, "Jurisdictions vested with apex and superior courts are general, wider in scope and extent, while constraints/prohibitions are narrower in their applications and dimensions-Jurisdiction of superior courts is to be stretched to take into its fold all disputes to be resolved while limitation of jurisdictions and powers are to be squeezed and kept to minimum extent and length---Such is the rule of interpretation of jurisdiction, scope and limitations of superior Courts of Pakistan."
8. On the strength of law laid down supra and keeping in view provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, I direct Secretary, Schools Education, Government of Punjab, Lahore to go through the contents of the writ petition along with its Annexures, hear the petitioner as well as respondent No,5 and then decide the impugned matter afresh strictly- in accordance with law within one month positively. Till the disposal of the instant case by the Secretary Schools Education, Government of the Punjab, the impugned order dated 23-6-2008 shall remain suspended.
9. The learned Assistant Advocate-General who is present in Court shall ensure compliance of this order and submit- a report to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
' The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.