AAMER FAROOQ, J. The petitioner is an employee of Islamabad Electric Supply Company and is aggrieved of orders dated 22.04.2021 and 28.04.2021, whereby he was transferred from Islamabad Electric Supply Company (IESCO), Islamabad and posted as Assistant Manager (HR/Admn) in IESCO City Circle, Rawalpindi and his promotion order dated 16.03.2009 from BS-17 to BS-18, was withdrawn.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contended that impugned orders are not tenable.
3. Learned counsel was confronted with the maintainability of instant petition in light of the fact that IESCO is not a statutory entity and does not have statutory rules of service; in reply, learned counsel submitted that instant petition is maintainable inasmuch as it involves enforcement of fundamental rights. Reliance was placed on cases reported as Pakistan Olympic Association through President and others v. Nadeem Aftab Sindhu and others' (2019 SCMR 221), 'Muhammad Rafi and another v. Federation of Pakistan and others' (2016 SCMR 2146), `Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and 2 others v. Government of Pakistan and others' (PLD 2009 Supreme Court 507), judgment of this Court dated 26.04.2018 in case titled 'Tahir Atique Siddiqui v.
Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Information and Technology, Islamabad and another' (I.C.A. No . 445-2019), Judgment dated 06.03.2019 of this Court in case titled 'Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd. and others v. Hafeez ur Rehman and others (I.C.A. No .337 of 2014) and Baqir Hussain v. Federation of Pakistan and others (I.C.A. No .653 of 2014).
4. Arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner have been heard and the documents, placed on record, examined with his able assistance.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is noted hereinabove therefore need not be reiterated.
6. Islamabad Electric Supply Company (IESCO) is an entity incorporated under the laws of Pakistan and the august apex Court in Civil Petition No.1591-2011 titled 'Chief Executive Officer PESCO, Peshawar v. Muhammad Aftab ur Rehman and others', vide order dated 21.06.2012, has already, observed that Distribution Companies (DISCOS) which includes IESCO, are juridical persons against whom petition under Article 199 of the Constitution is not maintainable.
7. This Court while following the referred judgment of the august Apex Court vide order dated 30.11.2016 in case titled 'Miss Mehwish Zaheer v. The Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and others' (I.C.A. No .501-2016) dismissed the appeal and held that a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution against IESCO is not maintainable.
8. The matter was agitated before august Apex Court against judgment of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Petitions Nos.1016 and others of 2017 in case titled 'Jamal Shah and others v. The Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power Government of Pakistan, Islamabad and others', vide judgment dated 07.03.2019, upheld the decision in Intra Court Appeal and observed that IESCO is not a statutory body nor were its employees governed by statutory rules.
9. This Court, even subsequently, followed the said view in case titled `Sardar Liaqat Ashraf and 7 others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power, Islamabad and 4 others' (W.P. No .2167-2015) and `Syed Mohsin Raza Gillani and 3 others v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power, Islamabad and 4 others (W. P. No .2216-2012) dismissed the said petitions on the same basis vide judgment dated 17.05.2018.
10. This Court in case titled `Manzoor Ahmed v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Water and Power Government of Pakistan and others' (W.P. No .2346-2017) refused to depart from the view taken by the august apex Court in Civil Petition No.1591-2011 in case tided 'Chief Executive Officer PESCO, Peshawar v. Muhammad Aftab ur Rehman and others', vide order dated 21.06.2012.
11. There is no cavil with the principles laid down in the case law cited by learned counsel for the petitioner however same are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of instant case.
12. It is pertinent to observe that TESCO is not a statutory body but is a Company incorporated under the laws of Pakistan.
13. Likewise, learned counsel for the petitioner faked to point out any violation of fundamental right of the petitioner. As noted above, the petitioner was demoted from BS-18 to BS-17 vide Office Order dated 22.04.2021 and was transferred vide order dated 28.04.2021. It is observed that transfer is exigency of service and no employee can claim C as a fundamental right to be posted at a particular station. Likewise, demotion was made after inquiry and no violation of any law whatsoever could be discerned from the record.
14. For what has been stated above, instant petition is without merit and is accordingly dismissed in limine.