1. DECISION An appeal has been filed by Post Master, Head Post Office, Multan, against the order dated 26-2- 1975 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Junior Labour Court, Multan, setting aside the order of transfer passed by the Post Master, Multan, regarding Hamid Hassan, Postal Clerk, respondent from Head Once, Multan, to Muzaffargarh Division. The case of the appellant is that originally the respondent belong to the cadre of the postal employees of Muzaffargarh Division wherefrom he was transferred to Multan Division under the order of the Post Master-General, and he could be repatriated to his parent division by the Post Master, Multan, as being competent under the rules to do so. It was also urged that transfer of a postal employee being purely an administrative action it could not be challenged in any Court. The contention put forward on behalf of the respondent is that the impugned order of transfer is not purely a transfer order and involves the terms and conditions of the respondent's service which basically entitled him to continue his service at Postal Head Office, Multan, till his transfer is ordered under his own consent or in pursuance of the postal service rules under competent sanction.
2. The learned Jug for Labour. Court accepted the petition of the respondent and directed resumption of duty by him at his job at Head Office, Multan, on the ground that the Post Master, Multan, had no authority to transfer him to another division not within his administrative jurisdiction.
3. It is admitted fact that the respondent originally being postal employee of Muzafargarh Division, was transferred with his own consent under rule 38 of the Post and Telegraph manual Volume No. 4 without any condition of his repatriation to Muzafargarh Division. I have been referred to an approved confirmation list dated 9-4-1973 maintained by the Head Post Office, Multan, (photostat Exh. R-A) his list has been sanctioned by the appellant himself as Post Master Head Office. Multan.
4. According to this list Mr. Hamid Hassan figures against serial No. 6 out of fourteen persons, whose confirmation was sanctioned against the post served by them at the Head Post Office, Multan.
5. There is no regular order subsequent to the date of this list modifying the order approving the said list of the confirmed officials. There is also no order or any departmental inter-division correspondence making out a case of retransfer or repatriation of the respondent to his so called parent office in Muzaffargarh Division. It has also been noted that no sanction was secured from the Post Master-General, for the transfer of the respondent to Muzafargarh Division nor the formalities prescribed under the rules were observed in this behalf.
6. Ordinarily there can hardly be two opinions on the point that transfer of a Government servant from one station or division to the other is primarily an administrative matter and a civil Court, muchless a Labour Court of limited jurisdiction should interfere in any such administrative action.
7. However, a transfer order affecting the basic terms and conditions of the workman service cannot be regarded a simple administrative action and its legal implications have to be gone into and the rights of the workman protected to save him from any loss of service benefit. On this view of the matter the impugned order of transfer in this case is a clear example calling for the intervention of the Court in scrutinising the peculiar circum--stances of the case. I have been referred to rule 15 of the Fundamental Rules, Volume 1, Second Edition on Post and Telegraph Service and also Post and Telegraph Manual, Volume III, Schedule 9 laying down the powers of different postal authorities apart from rule 38 dealing with the transfer and posting of the employees under Post and Telegraph Manual, Volume IV for the deter--mination of the present issue. A perusal of these rules give an impression that transfer of a postal employee from one division to the other ordinarily cannot be made without the consent of the official concerned. There may be exceptions to this rule, which have not been referred to or discussed before me. In such situation the repatriation of the respondent to his original division could not be ordered in face of his clear confirmation against the present job in Head Post Office, Multan, unless the respondent was fully apprised of his rights of Service as a result of the repatriation and of his definite place without affecting the rights of his service at the job he was ordered too serve in Muzafargarh Division. This being the position the order of transfer of the respondent was rightly excepted by the learned lower Court. The impugned order is therefore upheld. I would however observe that transfers of the postal staff from one place to the other or even the inter-division transfers are ordinarily matters relating to administrative jurisdiction and immune from the interference of the Courts so long any such transfer does not affect the basic terms and condition of the service of the employee would therefore direct that the postal authorities after taking back the respondent at his job at Head Post Office, Multan. should review his case in the light of the relevant rules of service and before retransfering him to Muzaffargarh Division should make out a clear case justifying this retransfer via-a-via his rights of seniority and the other of his employment. The order of his retransfer, if considered necessary and weil within the rules in the light of the aforesaid observations, it should be passed by a competent authority after taking into consideration all the relevant circumstances of the case to avoid any injustice to the respondent. The appeal is dismissed.