ORDER KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J. ~ Petitioner, a civil servant, is aggrieved against the order dated 25.5.1999, which affects the place of his, posting. By this impugned order, respondent No. 1 has cancelled the earlier office order dated 11.5.1999.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel that the order has been passed under the illegal influence of respondent No. 3, who is inimical towards the petitioner on account of some criminal' litigation. It is maintained that respondent No. 3 has no authority whatsoever in law to influence the transfers of civil servants. Arguments have also been submitted to show that the transfer order is otherwise illegal and in breach of policy.
3. In view of Article 212 (2) of the Constitution, this-Court is not called upon to adjudicate the above points. It, however, needs to be emphasized for the guidance of the departmental authorities that this Court as well as Supreme Court have been repeatedly laying down that public representatives like MNAs/MPAs and workers of political parties have no role to play in, the scheme of things said down in the Civil Servants Act and the relevant rules/instructions. The authorities in the department are bound to honour this declaration of the Supreme Court and to enforce the same.
4. If so advised, the petitioner may move a representation in accordance with rules/practice within the department. It is directed that the representation shall be duly examined and disposed of in accordance with law after allowing the petitioner to substantiate his point of view. Failing in the department, the petitioner will have to approach the Service Tribunal. If so advised and if permitted in law, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the Chief Election Commissioner against respondent No. 3 for his disqualification in respect of illegality allegedly having been committed.