' KHALID MAHMOOD RAMAY (MEMBER-V).--- This order shall dispose of Appeal No.5900/2015 filed by Mumtaz Hussain, Deputy District Education Officer (M-EE) Tehsil Jampur District Rajanpur against impugned order No.1610/Admn dated 21.12.2015 issued by E.D.0 Education Rajanpur transferring him from Deputy District Education Officer (M-EE) Tehsil Jampur to Govt. Boys Higher Secondary School Haji Pur Tehsil Jampur as S.S.S (BS-18).
2. Brief facts as narrated in the memorandum of appeal are that the appellant was made a victim of discrimination and his transfer was against the policy. It has been mentioned that the appellant was resident of District Dera Ghazi Khan but according to Policy No.SO(SE-1)15- 34/2013 he was appointed as Deputy District Education Officer (W-EE) Dera Ghazi Khan and because of the policy 2013 he was transferred from D.G. Khan to District Rajanpur on 16.04.2013. Later on he was again, transferred from Tehsil Rojhan to Tehsil Jampur on 24.09.2014 vide order No.5311/HC(E). That the appellant was performing his duties at his best level to achieve and implement Chief Minister Road Map for education, as per his claim, and succeeded in his target upto great extent but respondent No.2 without going through actual situation and achievement of the appellant transferred him in haste and against the policy of 2013. The appellant claimed to have been awarded with an appreciation certificate from respondents Nos.2 and 3.
3. It is further narrated in the appeal that in order to adjust one Dr. Ajmal Islam S.S.S. Govt. Higher Secondary School Dajal Tehsil Jampur as D.D.0 (M-EE) Tehsil Rajanpur, the appellant has been shifted from that place vide impugned order in violation of transfer policy of 2013. Against the said order the appellant filed a representation/departmental appeal on 23.12.2015 to the respondent No.1 for cancellation of the impugned order which is still pending and no decision has been made.
The appellant has claimed to have been dealt with illegally in violation of Article 4 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. It has been pointed out that vide impugned order he has been transferred on erratic basis which is against the departmental policy. The appellant also submitted an application under section 151, C.P.C. For suspension of operation of the impugned order praying that if operation of the impugned order is not suspended he would suffer an irreparable loss.
4. Arguments from counsel for the appellant as well as from learned District Attorney have been heard.
5. It is revealed by perusal of the record appended with the appeal that the appellant was transferred due to continuous poor performance in achieving goals/indicators set in Chief Minister Road Map for Education Sector and despite repeated instructions in Monthly District Review Committee meetings no visible improvement has been made to meet the target. Learned counsel has relied on an appreciation letter awarded to the appellant by the concerned District Education Authorities however the same is inadmissible in the eyes of law because it does not carry any date or period and is uncertified photocopy. Learned counsel for the appellant has very candidly conceded to the fact that the instant appeal is immature as is evident on the face of the record, i.e., the OCS carrier service receipt which makes it clear that the said departmental appeal was submitted to respondent No.1 on 23.12.2015.
6. Admittedly next to 23.12.2015 there were four declared holidays and hence the departmental appeal would have been in the pipe line to reach respondent No. 1, whereas the appellant without waiting for a reasonable time as has been prescribed in law has preferred the instant appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on 2015 SCM R 456 wherein it has been held by the Apex Court that in case of a wrong doing or any illegality or exertion of political influence a civil servant could avail relief by way of allowing him to approach service Tribunal without waiting for mandatory time span.
8. The counsel further relied upon Article 10(A) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan and agitated that the appellant has been deprived of the right of a fair trial by the respondent authorities by transferring him in violation of the policy 2013. He further elaborated that before present place of posting, when he was brought out of his own district as S.S.S. In Tehsil Tonsa, it was even in violation of the policy 2013. He agreed that the authorities should have sent him to his own district if such transfer deemed inevitable to the department on administrative grounds or otherwise. He requested for issuance of a status quo order in favour of the appellant but he was not able to put forth any plausible mention of irreparable loss which could have been incurred to the appellant in case of the instant transfer.
9. Learned District Attorney has vehemently opposed the contention of counsel for the appellant and stated that the instant appeal is not maintainable being premature, since the appellant has not exhausted the remedy available to him under law at the department level. He further pointed out that the appellant has not come to this Tribunal with clean hands because just after submitting the departmental appeal and without waiting for the mandatory time, rather even within a day or two, has approached this Tribunal. He further mentioned that the transfer has been made on administrative grounds as is evident by mere perusal of the impugned order which is not in any way violation of the policy.
10. He maintained that it is not required for the authorities to extend reasons for the transfer orders.
Whereas the instant impugned order is self explanatory containing the administrative grounds within itself. He further held that vide Section 9 of Punjab Civil Servants Act, 1974 any civil servant is bound to serve anywhere in the province and being basic law the same has an override effect on any other policy. He vehemently opposed issuance of an interim injunction in favour of the appellant since no irreparable loss has been mentioned even. Therefore, he requested for dismissal of the instant appeal being not maintainable.
11. Due consideration was given to the contents of the memorandum of the appeal, documents annexed and arguments of both the sides.
12. It is observed that the appellant was transferred to the impugned place of posting on his own request on 24.09.2014, hence his placement outside his district of domicile was dependent upon his own will and choice. Learned counsel for the appellant has himself conceded to the fact that the appeal is premature. In the instant case learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to bring to the light any documentary evidence which could have substantiated the genuineness of claim of the appellant nor there is any evidence otherwise available in this regard. The appellant had validly submitted his departmental appeal to the concerned authority but without waiting for the prescribed time he has preferred the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Although the counsel pointed out that the impugned transferred order has been issued in violation of the Policy of 2013 but neither such policy has been appended with the appeal nor the same has been produced during the course of proceedings.
13. Similarly reliance has been made on 2015 SCM R 456 but the appellant has not succeeded to put forth any mention of illegality, wrong doing or political influence in the issuance of the impugned order. Accordingly, the instant appeal is disposed of being premature and non maintainable at this stage. However, respondent No.1 is directed to decide the departmental appeal of the appellant, if pending with him, after fulfilling all legal and codal formalities preferably within a period of 30- days.