Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: KISHWAR BIBI VS Respondent: DEPUTY EDUCATION OFFICER
1993 P L C (C
1993 P L C (C.S.) 1754
[Lahore High Court]
Before Muhammad Arif, J
Mst. KISHWAR BIBI
versus
DEPUTY EDUCATION OFFICER
W.P. No. 5396 of 1993, decided on 29th May, 1993.
Civil service‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 199 & 212‑‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Grievance relating to transfer of civil servant‑‑‑Such grievance could not be made subject- matter of a petition under Art. 199 of the Constitution in that a resort thereto, was barred with the establishment of appropriate Service Tribunals under Art. 212 of the Constitution‑‑‑Matters relating to terms and conditions of service of a civil servant were within exclusive jurisdiction of Service Tribunal.
Muhammad Aslam Rajput for Petitioner.
ORDER
Petitioner is admittedly a civil servant and the grievance voiced through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 relates to her terms and conditions of service in that Mst. Rashida Parveen respondent No. 3 herein has been transferred by respondent No. 1 as FTC lady teacher to Government Girls Primary School, Chak No.319/JB, Markaz Toba Tek Singh, where the petitioner was performing her duties having been transferred to the said place from Government Girls Primary School Chak No. 293/J.B., Tehsil and District Toba Tek Singh. Such a grievance cannot be made the subject‑matter of a petitioner under Article 199 of the Constitution in that a resort thereto is barred with the establishment of appropriate Service Tribunal under Article 212 of the Constitution. See Nazir Hussain (Ex‑Director, Excise and Taxation), Administrator, Auqaf, N.W.F.P., Peshawar v. N.W.F.P. through the Chief Secretary/Secretary, Services and General Administration Department, Government of N: W.F.P., Peshawar and 2 others (1992 SCMR 1843), Syed Afzal Ahmad Hydari v. Secretary, Defence Production Division, Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi and 3 others (1991 SCMR 477), Muhammad Asif v. Secretary to Government of the Punjab, CAND Department, Lahore and 4 others (1990 PLC (C.S.) 257).
2. Confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioner was content with arguing that in his view an order rendered mala fide by the competent authority can be challenged directly before this Court and the remedy of appeal before the Service Tribunal is neither efficacious nor appropriate. The contention is devoid of any merit in the context of the bar created under Article 212 of the Constitution to question an order relatable to the terms and conditions of service of a civil servant, here. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed in limine.
A.A./K‑91/L Petition dismissed.