ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J. -This single judgment will dispose of this Intra-Court Appeal as well as Infra- Court Appeals No. 261-2010, 277-2010, 278-2010, 279-2010, 284-2010, 285-2010 and 286-2010, as all these matters have arisen out of one the same order passed by the learned Single Judge in Chamber dated 21.10.2010, challenging paragraphs No. 2 & 3 directly effecting the appellants and order dated 27.10.2010 seeking review of order dated 21.10.2010.
2. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the instant Intra-Court Appeals are that vide order dated 28.09.2010 the Executive District Officer (Revenue) furnished A list showing sanctioned strength of Patwaries in various Tehsils of District Rawalpindi, which transpires that there is a tendency in the patwaries working in small linked remote Tehsils, to have themselves moved to bigger Tehsils of Rawalpindi District where they have no work to do, by exercising political, leverage of, the local, politician; that 121 patwaries were recruited against 106 sanctioned strength and 12 moved to other Tehsils whereas 32 moved from, other Tehsils to Rawalpindi and as such total 141 patwaries were working in. Rawalpindi I .e. 35 over and above the sanctioned strength. The learned Judge in Chamber while disposing of Criminal Original No. 178-W2010 directed the Executive District Officer (Revenue) to return the surplus patwaries from all the Tehsils over and above the sanctioned strength to the tehsils of their origin. Against 303 sanctioned strength 307 patwaries were presently working under the Executive District Officer (Revenue), Rawalpindi, therefore, those who came from the smaller districts were ordered to be repatriated through the Board of Revenue Punjab.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the impugned order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the appellants and they were condemned unheard, that the appellants are civil servants for which the High. Court has no jurisdiction under Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 in the matter' related to the terms and conditions of their service; that the appellants were transferred on the sanctioned strength; that the appellants were not posted against the vacant posts rather they were transferred on mutual basis; that they did not fill any vacant post in Tehsil Rawalpindi directly; that the appellants were transferred in the year 2000 and their seniority list has, been prepared; that while dealing with the criminal original the learned Judge in Chamber ordered the transfers and postings; that respondent No. 1 passed the order dated 03.11.2010 under the garb of the order of the learned Single Judge in Chamber and repatriated the appellants to their place of initial appointment without considering the circumstances; that any revisional/appellate order, against the order passed by respondent No. 1 will be ornamental ; that to ascertain the political tendency behind such transfers the individual cases have to be sanctioned; the order impugned in these Intra-Court Appeals is final in view of the judgment reported as Nestle Milkpak Limited v. Classic Needs Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd.
And 3 others (2006 SCM R 21). Hence pray for setting aside of the impugned order.
4. Conversely, learned Assistant Advocate General submits that the impugned order had been complied with; that the appellants have the right to challenge the impugned order dated 03.11.2010 before a competent forum; that the appellants being Civil Servants cannot agitate the matter relating to the terms and conditions in Intra-Court Appeals; that the impugned order was rightly passed as it entails the implementation of the original order passed by this Court in letter and spirit.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record.
6. Admittedly, the appellants were not heard/represented either before the learned Single Judge or before respondent No. 1, who passed his order based upon the order of the learned Single. Judge.
Any political influence behind such posting/transfer requires a subjective analysis and scrutiny. The appellants being Civil Servants are prima-facie immune, from the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, since such transferring and posting come within the ambit of terms and conditions of the service. To our understanding the order assailed is offensive of principle of natural justice. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow all the aforesaid Intra-Court Appeals. However, respondent No. 1 is within his right to pass an appropriate order independent of the order dated 21.10.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.
Infra-Court .