Mst. SHAMIM AKHTAR vs GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
This matter arises from a constitutional writ petition filed by a school teacher challenging the administrative cancellation of her transfer order, which was recalled by the Deputy Education Officer upon the desire of a Member of the National Assembly and a Member of the Provincial Assembly. The core legal question is whether an administrative transfer or cancellation order passed by a competent authority under political influence or pressure warrants interference by the High Court under writ jurisdiction in the absence of established mala fides. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition in limine, holding that transfer and posting orders are purely administrative in nature and courts ought not to interfere with them without cogent reasons or clear proof of malice, as doing so would hamper the smooth functioning of government machinery. The key principle laid down is that while political pressures on civil servant postings are common, administrative orders issued by competent authorities will not be struck down unless specific mala fides or injustice is properly pleaded and established.
- Whether the High Court can interfere with administrative transfer and posting orders of civil servants without cogent reasons?
- Does the cancellation of a transfer order at the instance of public representatives vitiate the order in the absence of proven mala fides?
- Is an administrative order passed under political pressure automatically illegal if particulars of malice are not furnished?
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' The petitioner, Mst. Shamim Akhtar, a School Teacheress, has filed this writ petition against an order whereby her transfer from Government Girls Primary School, Chak No,213/G.B., Tehsil Sammundri, District Faisalabad to Government Middle School for Girls, Chak No, 199/G.B., Tehsil Sammundri, District Faisalabad, was cancelled by respondent No, 2, Deputy Education Officer (Women), Tehsil Sammundri, stating that the cancellation of her transfer had been desired by Ch. Abdullah Ghazi, a Member of the National Assembly (M.N.A) and Mr. Mazhar Ali Gill, a Member of the Provincial Assembly (M.PA). Government of the Punjab has been impleaded as respondent No,1, through the Secretary Education, Civil Secretariat, Lahore.
2. Order, dated the 4th February, 1991 which has been assailed here reads as follows:- "CANCELLATION OF ADJUSTMENT.
The adjustment order issued vide this office No, 477/Admn. Date 30-1-1991 in respect of Mst.
Shamim Akhtar , P.T.C. Government Git Middle School 199/GB is hereby cancelled with immediate effect desired by Ch. Muhammad Abdullah Ghazi, M.NA. NA.60 & Mazh Ali Gill, M.PA., PP.No,49.
(Sd.)
(MRS. AKBAR LATIF)
DEPUTY EDUCATION OFFICER TEHSIL SAMMUNDRI."
' In good old days, it used to be stated in the orders of postings and transfers the same have been made in the public interest but, strangely enough, in above order instead of saying that the order has been issued in the public intere it has been specifically mentioned that it has been made in compliance with desire of an M.NA. And an M.PA.
3. Plea of learned counsel for the petitioner was that the said M.NA. Are M.PA. Belonged to the I.J.I.
And that they had pressurized the Deputy Education Officer (Women) (respondent No, 2) to make the impugned order. It was however, not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No had the authority to pass the order in question. Thus, the said order was made t a competent authority. As for the averment of the petitioner that respondent No had cancelled her transfer under the pressure of the said M.NA. And M.PA., it not infrequently that, in our country, pressures are exerted in connection will postings and transfers of civil servants and other matters relating thereto but it for the authorities competent to make orders in this regard to succumb to, resist, such pressures. If the pressures are aimed at promoting public interes then they can hardly be objected to, but if they are meant for causing trouble any civil servant or to do an injustice to him, the position would be different Nature of the pressure alleged to have been exerted by the said M.NA. And M.P.A. In the present case has not been explained by the petitioner. It has bee vaguely stated by the petitioner that their interference was mala fide. Particular of the alleged malice on their part, however, have not been furnished by her. Am, therefore, unable to comment on the type of pressure attributed to them.
4. Order cancelling the transfer of the petitioner is an order administrative nature; and if the Courts start interfering with such orders, without cogent reasons, it would hamper smooth working of the Government machinery.
5. Keeping all the aforesaid factors in view, I am not inclined to admit the writ petition for regular hearing and dismiss it in limine. es
Cited by 3 cases
- MUNAWAR ALI PATHAN vs PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and 2 others 2011 PLC (C.S.) 785
- GHULAM MUHAMMAD MALLAH vs PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief 2009 PLC (C.S.) 120
- Ghulam Muhammad vs Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary and 2 2009 C.L.R. 948