' The petitioner in this Constitutional petition has prayed for declaration that orders dated 4-9-1990.
And 23-8-1990 are illegal, void ab initio, without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of this Constitutional petition are that the petitioner joined Health Department as Junior Clerk. His appointment was made through office order (Annexure 'A).
The petitioner thereafter was promoted as Steno-typist vide order dated 30-1-1982. Thereafter he was posted as Accounts Assistant vide order dated 18-5-1989. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No, 1 through impugned order dated 4-9-1990 has directed petitioner's transfer as Stenographer and instead posted respondent No, 3 as Accounts Assistant. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the petition argued that the order is illegal and without jurisdiction because through the impugned order the cadre of the petitioner has been changed and that respondent No, 3 was earlier transferred on complaint, there existed no justification to introduce him once again.
3. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record. It is clear from the perusal of office order dated 18-5-1989 appended by the petitioner as Annexure `B' with the petition that although the petitioner was working as Cashier/Accountant when he was posted as Accounts Assistant, yet his designation was Stenographer.
4. The petitioner was in fact transferred vide order dated 11-6-1990 but he represented against this transfer to respondent No,
1. It seems that the order was held in abeyance and ultimately the respondent No, 1 accorded the approval of petitioner's posting against his original post vide order dated 4-9-1990. It is clear from the original order of transfer appended as Annexure `J/1' with this petition that the post of Accounts Assistant is in BS-11 while that of the Stenographer in BS-12, therefore, if the petitioner has objected to his posting as Accounts Assistant, then he would have been justified but he cannot object to his posting back to his original post having better scale.
5. The petitioner is a civil servant, therefore, grievance as to change of adder and terms and conditions can only be made before the Punjab Service Tribunal. The jurisdiction of all Courts including this Court is barred under Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Therefore, no ending is recorded as to the merits of this plea. The petitioner has failed to makout a case for interference in Constitutional jurisdiction as there is no violation of law and rules. No other point was argued.
' The result is that there is no merit in this petition and the same is .Dismissed in limine. C.M. Nos. 1 and 2 of 1990 are dismissed as infructuous.