The present writ petition and similar other numerous writ petitions were admitted to regular hearing placing reliance on Syed Mazhar Hussain Bokhari v. Secretary to Government of Punjab Local Government and Rural Development Department and others (1996 SCM R 59).
2. Notice was issued to the respondents and replies were filed in many cases. In other cases they were yet to file the replies when the learned Advocate/--General Punjab was summoned to state the Policy of the Government on 2-6-1996. Mr. Abdul Sattar Najam, the learned Advocate-General appeared, while objecting to the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, he conceded that the majority of the transfers were under the direction of political personage and the persons effected adversely by such directive had also filed writ petitions. He however, expressed no objection to the acceptance of all the writ petitions pertaining to transfers in Education Department and gave an undertaking that the departmental officers shall reconsider the transfers keeping in view the Rules of the Government in this behalf.
3. This Court in Mst. Nasreen Siddique v. District Education Officer (W), Sahiwal and others (1991 M LD 2214) had expressed deep anguish in transfer matters of civil servants in the following words:-- "Under the Constitution commitment is made to run the country in consonance with the golden principles enshrined in the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah, our commitment to assure the supremacy of fairness, decency and justice is irrevocable and is mandated in. The Constitution. The functions of various organs of the State are enumerated in the Constitution. I am very clear in my mind that nowhere under our Constitutional dispensation the M.N.A's/M.P.A.'s public representatives are required to interfere with the working of the Executive. Seen from this perspective the duty is cast upon the competent Authority to resist the evil influence and conduct themselves in accordance with the dictates of the Constitution. The copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Province of Punjab, Lahore.
In Zahid Akhtar v. Government of Punjab and 2 others PLD 1995 SC 530, it was argued that the "ratio decidendi" was that writs were not maintainable and it was deemed appropriate that the matter be left to the parties to take the same to the Punjab Service Tribunal for adjudication. This contention raised on behalf of the respondents in Syed Mazhar Hussain Bokhari's case was not acceptable to their lordships in the Supreme Court. It was observed by their lordships in Mazhar Bokhari's case:-- "------..The directions issued in Zahid Akhtar's case supra are apparently covered under Article 187 (1X2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and are prima facie enforceable throughout Pakistan. The directions by this Court were not made to be flouted with impunity by them in letter and spirit. "
4. In Mazhar Bokhari's case, referred supra, their Lordships granted leave to appeal to consider: (1) whether the impugned order of transfer dated 13-10--1994 and subsequent order of cancellation dated 2-11-1994 were passed by the competent Authorities; (2) what is the effect of violation of the directions made by this Court in the precedent case of Zahid Akhtar v. Government of Punjab and 2 others (PLD 1995 SC 530); and (3) if answer to proposition at (1) be in affirmative, whether the impugned orders have become extraordinary in the light of observations of this Court in Zahid Akhtar's case (PLD 1995 SC 530) and have become coram non judice involving question of jurisdictional defect as settled by this Court in Malik v. Supreme Appellate Court of Sind II of Karachi and others (PLD 1995 SC 505) and, therefore, jurisdiction of this Court is not barred."
5. Keeping in view the leave granting order by the Supreme Court in Mazhar's case referred supra and admission by the learned Advocate-General on 2-6-1996, all the writ petitions regarding transfers in Education Department listed for today are accepted. The transfer orders impugned in each of the petition are set aside. The respondents are directed to look into the cases afresh as per undertaking given by the learned Advocate-General Punjab, keeping in view the Rules made and promulgated by the Government of Punjab in this behalf.
There shall be no order as to costs.