Pakistan Case Law
1997 PLC (C.S.) 121

Miss RUKHSANA IJAZ vs SECRETARY, EDUCATION, PUNJAB And Others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1997 PLC (C.S.) 121
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No. 1684-L of 1996 W.P. No. 8213/1996
Date1996-11-20
Judge(s)Fazal 1lahi Khan, Zia Mahmood Mina and Raja Afrasiab Khan
Authored byZia Mahmood Mirza
ResultCase remanded
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an interim stay order passed by the Lahore High Court in a service dispute between two civil servants regarding their transfer and posting. The core legal question was whether the High Court possessed the jurisdiction to entertain a constitutional petition challenging the transfer and posting orders of civil servants, given the statutory framework governing service matters. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that disputes regarding the transfer and posting of civil servants relate exclusively to the terms and conditions of their service. Consequently, such matters fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal, and the jurisdiction of the High Court is expressly barred by the Constitution. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's stay order, ruling that the High Court must first determine the question of its own jurisdiction before granting any interim relief in such service-related disputes. The principle laid down is that the High Court lacks jurisdiction to interfere in matters of transfer and posting of civil servants, as these are exclusively within the domain of the Service Tribunal under Article 212 of the Constitution.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the High Court have jurisdiction to entertain a constitutional petition regarding the transfer and posting of civil servants?
  • Are disputes concerning the transfer and posting of civil servants considered matters relating to the terms and conditions of service?
  • Must the High Court decide the question of its jurisdiction before passing an interim stay order in a service-related matter?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 212(2), Constitution of Pakistan 1973
service mattertransfer and postingjurisdiction of High CourtService Tribunalcivil servantconstitutional petitioninterim stay order

ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.---Respondent No. 3 herein was posted as Assistant Education Officer (W), Markaz Narowal, when by order dated 6-2-1996, passed by the Director of Education (EE), Gujranwala Division, she was transferred and posted as SST/HM at Government Girls Middle School, Chandar-ke-Rajpootan vice the petitioner who in turn was posted as Assistant Education Officer (W), Markaz Narowal. Respondent after approaching the higher authorities in the Education Department filed a Constitutional petition in the Lahore High Court to challenge the aforementioned order of her transfer on the ground, inter alia, that the present petitioner was not eligible to be posted as Assistant Education Officer because she did not have five years' experience requisite for such a post but she got herself posted as Assistant Education Officer by using the political influence of a Special Assistant to the Chief Minister. Learned Judge in the High Court vide order dated 3-7-1996 admitted the writ petition to regular hearing and suspended the operation of the impugned transfer order. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court to seek leave to appeal against the stay order issued by the High Court.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Both the petitioner and respondent No. 1 are admittedly civil servants. Dispute between them relates to their transfer/posting which is a matter relatable to the terms and conditions of their service. Disputes about these matters fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal and the jurisdiction of the High Court is excluded in such matters by virtue of the express provisions of A Article 212(2) of the Constitution. It appears that the learned Judge in the High Court has not duly attended to this aspect of the matter before issuing the stay order. In the circumstances, we convert this petition into an appeal and allow it.

The impugned stay order is set aside and it is directed that the High Court should first decide the question of its jurisdiction before passing any stay order.

Cited by 4 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.