GHULAM MUST AFA MUGHAL, J.---- The captioned petition for leave to appeal arises out of the judgment dated 4.8.2018 passed by the learned High court in W rit Petition No, 25 of 2018.
2. The precise facts forming the background of the captioned petition for leave to appeal are that the petitioner , herein, was given the charge of Secretary Local Government Board vide notification dated 28.12.2017. He submitted his joining report on the same day. It was claimed that the petitioner remained without posting in the department for a pretty long time, therefore, on the basis of political pressure and with mala fide intention, the respondents want to cancel the aforesa id notification dated 28.12.2017. The petitioner filed writ of prohibition before the Azad Jammu and Kashmir High Court on 3.1.2018. The learned High Court sought comments from the other side and after hearing the parties through the impugned dated 4.6.2018 has dismissed the writ petition in limine.
3. Ch. Shoukat Aziz, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is a senior most employee of the Local Government Board and has not been adjusted for a pretty long period on the ground of political pressure. He argued that the petitioner was given the charge of the post of Secretary Local Government Board vide notification dated 28.12.2017 because some disciplinary proceedings are in contemplation against the Government Secretary , The learned Advocate argued that without adjusting the petitioner , respondents want to remove the petitioner from the post, The learned Advocate argued that the petitioner has a right to be adjusted in the service of Local Government Board on the post which is held by him substantively .
4. Sardar M.R. Khan, the learned Advocate appearing for the respondents argued that the petitioner was not posted on permanent basis on the post of Secretary Local Government Board. He was just given the charge of the post because the Government Secretary was suspended and some disciplinary proceedings were intended against him by the competent authority . The learned Advocate argued that as the incumbent Secretary/Intervener is to be adjusted on the post by the competent authority , therefore, the writ of prohibition filed by the petitioner , herein, has rightly been dismissed by the learned High Court because the same relates to terms and conditions of the service of the petitioner .
5. I have heard the learned Advocate representing the parties and have gone through the record of the case. The learned High Court has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the matter agitated before the High court relates to the terms and conditions of the service of the petitioner , therefore, proper forum is Service Tribunal.
Although, the writ of prohibition is an independent remedy provided by the constitution to an aggrieved person but the fact remains that the petitioner , herein, has been given the charge of the post and he legally cannot contest on the basis of that charge for appointment as Secretary Local Government B-20, therefore, no any legal question of public importance is involved in the case. The petition for leave to appeal is, therefore, dismissed. However , it is desired that the petitioner be adjusted on the post to which he is entitled under the relevant rules because leaving a permanent employee without any post for an indefinite period is neither desirable not the policy of the Government.