By an order dated 11-6-1996 the learned Punjab Labour Court No.3, Lahore, at Ferozewala, rejected the prayer of the petitioner for staying his transfer from one place to another: and he has preferred the present revision petition to assail the soundness of the said order.
2. I nave heard the learned counsel for the parties, and given my careful consideration to the submissions made by the petitioner in particular.
3. The learned Labour Court has, I must say, dealt with the matter in a comprehensive, as also objective manner. My own experience is that the civil servants and the employees of autonomous bodies generally exert political influence and make use of their contacts in getting posts and places of their choice, and if and when such a bid is foiled, they rush to Courts quid do not even hesitate to have recourse to the High Court by filing w ria petitions for restraining or quashing orders of their transfer.
4. In the instant case also, it has happened like that, as would be revealed, on a perusal of the impugned order itself. This person seems to be fond of the Construction Directorate, where he had a long stay, stretching over about 8-1/2 years. From there he was shifted to HNZD (O&M), responsible for water supply, as also sewerage and drainage of the city. He had to be allocated to some Sub-Division, and was posted in the City Sub---Division, vide order dated 22-3-1995, initial orders transferring him from the Directorate of Construction to the DMD (O &'A) having, been issued on 13-3-1995. He had not yet joined and the orders had not been implemented, and he was asked to join duty in the Township Division. It is rightly maintained by the respondents that these were not three transfers it was in actual practice a single event of shifting of the official. He did not relish his assignment and made approaches to the Member, WASA of the LDA, for his transfer to the Construction Division, where in accordance with his own desire he was shifted on 5-6-1995 in place of one Taj Din, who got a stay order from a Court of law, with the result that the posting order of the petitioner could not be implemented and he was asked to join duty in the Shahdara Sub-Division.
This post again was not one of his liking and he endeavored to have his posting in the Hydrology Directorate. He was successful, but this order to could not be acted upon, and he had to go to the Drainage Division, where he reported for duty on 8-2-1996.
5. It is thus not a long chain of transfers; but even if one, in service of I the Government or a corporate body, has to face such a dilemma, he has no right to grumble, since a subordinate (and even an officer) is liable to transfer anywhere any the, and it is not the vested right of an employee to remain posted at a particular place or stick to an assignment of choice. Presumption is that shifting of an employee is ordered in public interest, in exigencies of service, or for administrative reasons. It has aptly been observed by the learned Presiding Officer of the lower Court that assertion of an employee that he has been shifted owing to his trade union activities, not liked by his superiors, or that he has been made a victim of vengeance by his officers, cannot be taken for granted, and must not be believed, without any evidence in support. The petitioner, in this case, has not been able to bring home his stand-point that what he calls his frequent shifting a sequel to his being an activist or a founder member of his trade union. His status of being a workman, eligible to invoke the jurisdiction of the Labour Court, in the matter, is also a matter of doubt still, and he will have to establish it, by leading relevant evidence in the lower Court. He is only trying to hoodwink the factual position and exploit the issue for furtherance of his selfish ends. This he ought not be allowed to do.
6. The impugned order is not at all exceptionable, and the petitioner has no case for restraining his shifting from one place to another; and the revision petition, therefore, is dismissed, being without merit. There shall be no order as to costs.