' The relevant facts for the decision of this Constitutional petition are that the petitioner was serving as Acting Managing Director (Distribution) with an additional charge of Managing Director (Power), the WAPDA. The grievance is that he has been transferred and made O.S.D. On anonymous complaint. It is added that the Ehtesab Cell has no authority to directly entertain any application, therefore, all proceedings by respondent No,3 are illegal. In this behalf reference is made to section 24 of Ehtesab Act, 1997.
2. It is argued that the matter does not pertain to terms and conditions, therefore, the petitioner can maintain writ petition. It is argued that when the basic order i,e, the order of transfer is illegal, then all actions in pursuance of the same are liable to be struck off.
3. The petition came up for limine hearing on 14-4-1998 when the respondents were directed to submit report and parawise comments within two weeks. The order has been complied with. It is maintained that the respondent No,3 is not seized of the matter, in fact a complaint was received by the Prime Minister's Accountability and Coordination Cell, which conducted the preliminary investigation in the matter. The allegation prima facie was found correct, therefore, recommendations were made to the Minister for Water and Power to either suspend the petitioner or make him O.S.D.
4. It is argued that the petitioner has no vested right to claim posting at a particular place or against a particular post. It is also argued that the action has been taken in public interest.
5. I have given my anxious consideration and gone through the record. It seems that the petitioner is mixing up respondent No,3 which is now a statutory functionary and not part and parcel of Prime Minister's Secretariat with the Accountability and Coordination Cell, therefore, the argument that respondent No,3 had no authority to directly entertain any complaint or application is irrelevant.
6. Now coming to the transfer and posting of the petitioner as O.S.D. Suffice it is to observe that it is a matter of terms and conditions and action has been taken on account of serious allegations against the petitioner who has no vested right to remain posted at a particular place or post. In this behalf I may refer to "Pakistan v. Muazzam Hussain Khan and another" (PLD 1959 SC 13) and "Pakistan v. Fazal Rahman Khundkar and another" (PLD 1959 SC 82).
7. The upshot of this discussion is that there is no merit in this petition. The same is dismissed.