1. S. WAJIHUDDIN AHMAD, J.--We have heard this matter. Evidently an earlier petition filed by the petitioner namely, 983 of 1993 was disposed of by this Court and the matter upon a statement from the side of respondents was remanded for reconsideration by the respondent No.2, Vice--- President, Pakistan Central Cotton Committee, on the basis that his earlier decision in the appeal of the petitioner did not spell out any reasons.
2. The same officer through an order dated 23-9-1993 maintained the transfer of the petitioner to Multan but gave reasons for the same which, on examination, we find to be more in the nature of repudiation of averments of the petitioner in the appeal rather than adjudications by a superior officer competent to hear an appeal. Let its legible copy as Annexure `R-1' be placed on this file.
3. Apart from the foregoing, we have been referred to a letter of objection addressed by the Director of same institute at Multan dated 1-4-1993 where he objected to the transfer of the petitioner on the ground that before making any transfer his consent may be taken, inter alia, because such transfer orders create disciplinary problems at the Multan Branch. He also observed that he did not know of the qualifications of the Research Assistant or of the reason for her transfer to Multan institute. In the margin of such letter the respondent No.2, who heard the petitioner's appeal wrote, "He need not know the reason". Underneath the letter the same respondent made observation, "I do not like the tone. Please inform him and he should be careful in future". Significantly, this document, as R/U has been filed with the comments, As R/V is another document which showed that in "turn the said letter of the Director, Cotton Research Institute, Multan, was returned to him without so much as, a reply and with the tacit remark, "the contents are not acceptable by the competent authority". To say the least, these matters are reminiscent of an imperial and dictatorial system of Government and don't fit into our system at all which is based on the rule of law. This also indicates that there may be substance in what the petitioner pleads namely, that the officers whom she had identified are motivated by bias against her.
4. In such circumstances, we admit this petition to regular hearing.
3. Since ex facie the exercise of power of transfer is a colourable exercise, the order may ultimately be found, if the petition is accepted, to be void. For this reason, we grant this application.