Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. FD‑31 of 1984, decided on.29th May, 1984.

‑‑‑Transfer on account of complaints‑‑Amounts to punishment‑‑Oppor tunity of explanation necessary‑‑Railway servant (Train Supervisor) transferred on basis of certain complaints without opportunity of explanation‑‑Such transfer prohibited under Pakistan Railways Gazette No. 23, dated 1‑12‑1983 directing that instead of transfer disciplinary proceedings should be drawn up‑‑Transfer order in disregard of directions, held, violative of guaranteed right of petitioner‑appellant (Railway servant) and not sustainable‑‑Order of Labour Court dismissing grievance petition and impugned transfer order set aside by Appellate Tribunal‑‑Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Ss. 25‑A 38(3).

Rana M.F. Rehman for Appellant.

Ch. Noor Hussain for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 26th May, 1984.

The appeal captioned above is directed against the decision, dated 21‑12‑1983 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No.7, Gujranwala, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant made against his transfer was dismissed.

2. The appellant, had previous to his transfer to Faisalabad, applied for mutual transfer from Gujranwala to Sialkot but it was rejected. After a few months he was transferred to Faisalabad instead of Sialkot on account of certain complaints by the Station Master, Gujranwala and Traffic Inspector, Wazirabad as mentioned in the written statement. The nature and details of the complaints have not been explained. It is clear that the transfer was not in the exigencies of service but on account of certain complaints. The file does not show if any enquiry was held in respect of the complaints and the appellant given opportunity of hearing. When a transfer is on account of certain complaints, it is by way of punishment, so in such cases giving the person concerned opportunity to explain the allegations and complaints is necessary. Transfer by way of punishment is prohibited as is evident from P.R. Gazette No. 23, dated 1‑12‑1983, copy Exh.P.5. It has been directed in the notification by the Chairman, Railway Board that disciplinary A proceedings should be drawn up instead of transferring the staff. The case of the appellant is covered by this notification. The order of transfer was made in total disregard of the said notification, thus is not sustainable. The appellant has a guaranteed right under the rules to explain the allegations made against him. As the order of transfer was passed by way of punishment without affording opportunity to defend himself against the allegations, the right guaranteed to him was violated and thus the order of transfer is not sustainable.

3. As a result of what has been said above, the appeal is accepted and setting aside the impugned decision of the learned lower Court and the order of transfer, the appellant is directed to be sent back to Gujranwala. This order will not stand in the way of Railway, if .they are inclined to accept the long standing request of the appellant for his transfer to Sialkot.

A. E.

Appeal accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.