' QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.--- Through the instant petition, the petitioner Noor Muhammad seeks to declare the Notification No,SO(B/T)E&SE/9- 5/2013/BISE, D.I.Khan dated 10-1-2013 issued by the Secretary, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Elementary and Secondary Education Department whereby he was repatriated to his parent organization i.e, Gomal University, D.I.Khan on administrative grounds as illegal, void ab initio, against the law, based on mala fide and without lawful authority.
2. Precise facts leading to the instant petition are that while serving as Assistant Professor (BS-19) at Gomal University, D.I.Khan in the department of Sports, Sciences and Physical Education, the petitioner was appointed on deputation basis as Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, D.I. Khan vide Notification No,SO(B/T)E&SE/9-5/2012/BISE, D.I. Khan dated 21-2-2012 for a period of two years and he accordingly submitted his arrival report and assumed the charge and while performing his duties with sincerity, devotion and to the best of his abilities, the petitioner did his best to do everything possible for the purchase and construction of building for the Board and in the petition, he has counted his services in that direction, when all of a sudden, vide Notification No,SO(B/T)E&SE/9- 5/2013/BISE, D.I. Khan dated 10-1-2013, the petitioner was repatriated to his parent organization i.e, Gomal University, D.I.Khan on administrative grounds with immediate effect and instead, the respondent No,8 was appointed on deputation basis for a period of two years with immediate effect. Aggrieved of the same, the petitioner has preferred the instant petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that through the impugned notification, the petitioner was condemned unheard without calling for his explanation or issuing any show-cause notice to him in this respect; that the impugned order is prima facie illegal, tainted with mala fide and thus not sustainable in the eye of law; that the petitioner was punished for the various construction activities that he had undertaken at the BISE, D.I. Khan with his sincere efforts; that the petitioner even preferred a departmental appeal on 11-1-2013 to the respondents and even submitted a reminder on 17-1-2013 but with no fruitful results; that the impugned order is in clear violation of section 24(A) of the General Clauses Act as the same is neither a speaking nor a reasoned order; that the petitioner has not as yet completed his two years tenure as per the deputation order; that the petitioner was not given an even handed treatment in accordance with law and, therefore, the impugned notification dated 10-1-2013 warrants to be declared illegal, based on mala fide and without lawful authority.
4. Arguments heard and available record perused.
5. As the record reveals, vide Notification No,SO(B/T)E&SE/9- 5/2012/BISE, D.I. Khan dated 21-2-2012, the petitioner while serving as Assistant Professor (BS-19) Gomal University, D.I.Khan, was appointed as Chairman, BISE, D.I.Khan on deputation basis for a period of two years or till the age of his superannuation. Having served against the said post for about a year, vide notification dated 10-1- 2013, the competent authority appointed the respondent No,8 as Chairman, BISE, D.I.Khan on deputation basis for a period of two years with immediate effect and simultaneously repatriated the petitioner to his parent organization i.e, Gomal University, D.I. Khan on administrative grounds with immediate effect.
6. For the redressal of his grievance, the petitioner initially filed a declaratory suit before the learned Senior Civil Judge, D.I. Khan wherein he also made a prayer for the grant of interim relief and when the same was declined to him, he approached the appellate forum for the same very relief which was also turned down on 21-1-2013 by the learned Additional District Judge-III, D.I.Khan. Instead of challenging the orders of the learned lower courts in the same hierarchy by way of revision petition before this court, the petitioner opted to withdraw the civil suit from the learned lower court on 22- 1-2013 and approached this court through the instant petition on 23-1-2013.
7. As far as the main grievance of the petitioner regarding non-completion of his deputation period of two years and his repatriation to his parent organization is concerned, we are afraid the same is misconceived under the law. It is by now a settled law in view of a chain of judgments of the honourable superior courts that a deputationist may not necessarily complete the tenure for which he was deputed and the power rests and vests with the competent authority in its discretion to repatriate a deputationist as and when deemed proper. Similarly, in the case of transfer on deputation, no vested right accrues to a deputationist to continue for the period of deputation and there is no law in the field to support such grievance of the petitioner. It is always within the discretion of the competent authority to repatriate a deputationist as and when the exigencies of service require and in the matter in hand, the phrase 'administration grounds' per se is sufficient to repatriate the petitioner back to his Alma Mater. In this respect reliance can be placed on 2000 SCMR 656, 2005 PLC (C.S.) 1207 (Peshawar High Court), 2003 PLC (C.S.) 243 (Lahore High Court) and 1998 PLC (C.S.) 839 (Lahore High Court).
8. We are otherwise at a loss to know as to why a person with a rich teaching experience behind him shies away from being repatriated to his parent organization when the order of repatriation does not carry any stigma. We have noticed with a degree of concern as to the adhochism being practiced at the highest level. The case in hand is one such example. In countries and societies which have developed by leaps and bounds, education is always placed at the highest pedestal and is always given its due importance vis-a-vis the other sectors and the other strata of the society. Unfortunately, in our part of the world, education sector has been assigned the back seat and is rather being held with a degree of contempt by a section of society with myopic outlook and elitist thinking. Likewise, the importance of secondary boards under whose auspices examinations at the matric and intermediate level are conducted, under whose watchful eyes papers are checked and merit is in turn determined and which in fact serve as the nurseries for all professional colleges can in no manner be minimized. Why not competence, good educational background, rich experience and above all impeccable honesty be the sine qua non for appointment against such important post and to put an end to stop-gap arrangements should be on top agenda of the authorities who matter. It is about time to take a leap forward.
9. For the reasons mentioned above, the instant petition being bereft of any merit is hereby dismissed in limine.