RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, CJ. The appellant, herein, by filing appeal before the Service Tribunal, challenged the notification dated 25.10.2019, whereby she was transferred from the Post Graduate College Muzaffarabad, to the Government Girls Degree College Authmuqam. The learned Service Tribunal vide impugned judgment dated 01.07.2020, has dismissed the appeal which is the subject matter of this appeal.
2. Sardar Muhammad Habib Zia, Advocate, the learned counsel for the appellant argued that the impugned judgment is against law and the facts of the case. He submitted that a post of Lecturer Political Science was lying vacant in the Government Girls Degree College Authmuqam, which was advertised and after conducting selection process, instead of making appointment against the vacant post, the concerned authorities transferred the appellant and in place of the appellant appointed the newly selected candidate. He drew the attention of the Court towards a notification issued by the Secretariat of Higher Education on 23.10.2019 and submitted that it is clear from the notification that the post was vacant at the Girls Degree College Authmuqam which was advertised; therefore; the newly selected candidate should have appointed against the vacant post, but the learned Service Tribunal has not considered this aspect of the case in a legal manner.
He further submitted that the appellant has been transferred illegally during the academic session and this point was forcefully agitated before the Service Tribunal but the learned Service Tribunal failed to appreciate the same in a legal manner.
3. On the other hand, Syed Saroosh Gillani and Syed Ashfaq Hussain Kazmi, Advocates, the learned 'counsel for the respondents strongly controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. They submitted that the impugned judgment is perfectly legal which is not open for interference by this Court. They contended that the appellant was transferred on the ground of long stay period at one station, therefore, no illegality has been committed by the departmental authorities by issuing the impugned transfer order and the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. They further added that there is no policy existed that a Lecturer cannot be transferred during the academic session, therefore, this argument is ill-founded.
4. We have heard the arguments and examined the record made available along with the impugned judgment. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that the transfer order has been issued illegally during academic session, appears to have no substance as in support of the version that transfer of the teaching, staff of the institutions cannot be made during academic session, nothing has been produced by the appellant before this Court in spite of the fact that the learned Service Tribunal while attending this point has observed that no such policy is holding the field.
5. To appreciate the other burning argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned transfer order is the result of political influence, we perused the record carefully. From the perusal of the record, it appears that a post of Lecturer Political Science was lying vacant at Girls Degree College Authmuqam which was advertised and after conducting test and interview, the concerned authorities filled in the B same by transferring the appellant from Post Graduate College Muzaffarabad. The selection process was conducted for making appointment against the vacant post but after conducting the selection process the same has been filled in by transferring the appellant and in place of the appellant the newly appointed candidate has been adjusted. The appellant in the memo of appeal filed before the Service Tribunal as well as before this Court has taken the plea that just to accommodate the person of choice the appellant has been transferred on the political basis but in response to this plea, in the objections/comments filed by the respondents, it has not been explained that why the appointment of newly selected candidate has not been made against the post which was advertised and after completing the selection process she was selected on merit. Keeping in view the peculiar facts of the case, the plea of exploitation of the political influence, taken by the appellant in the instant matter, cannot be ruled out. This Court time and again has held that transparency should be reflected from every act done by the authorities and where any lacuna in this regard is found that cannot be ignored lightly. In a case reported, as Abdul Rasheed and 85 others v. Board of Trustees and 3 others [2008 SCR 417], this Court held that if mala fide intention transpires from the record the Court is under its bounded duty to hold that the process is not transparent and is tainted with ill-will. We deem it proper to observe here that all judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative authorities while exercising mandatory or discretionary jurisdiction must follow the rule of fair exercise of power in a reasonable manner and must ensure the dispensation of justice c according to spirit of law. The exercise of power in unreasonable manner is not proper and in such a case the process initiated/order issued by any of the authorities is not immune from judicial review. As in the instant matter the respondents failed to give plausible reply on the allegation of involvement of political influence and justification for not making appointment of the newly selected candidate against the vacant post, which creates a lacuna in the transparency of the process of impugned adjustments; therefore; the notification dated 23.10.2019, to the extent of adjustments of the appellant and private respondent, herein, is cancelled and the concerned authorities are directed to reissue the order in a transparent manner.
The appeal stands accepted in the terms listed above. No order as to costs.