C.P.No.D-3484 of 2015

1. For orders on office objection

2. For Katcha Peshi

3. For hearing of CMA-9810/2015

C.P.No.D-4633 of 2015

1. For Katcha Peshi

2. For hearing of CMA-13021/2015

03.05.2016

Mr. Bhajandas Tejwani advocate for petitioners in CPD-4633/2015.

Mr. David Lawrence advocate for SEPCO a/w Sattar Bux Soomro, Manager (Legal) and Deepak Kumar DM (HR) SEPCO, Sukkur.

Mian Mumtaz Rabbani, Deputy Attorney General.

...............

We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length. The grievance of the petitioners appears to be that the petitioners, who are performing their duties as Junior Engineers in SEPCO for about more than 10 to 14 years, are being affected pursuant to impugned office orders issued by PEPCO authorities, whereby, about 27 engineers have been transferred from LESCO, GEPCO and IESCO and posted in SEPCO in BPS-17 and 18 in violation of PEPCO transfer policy, as according to learned counsel for the petitioners, neither there was any request made on behalf of SEPCO i.e. borrowing organization nor while issuing impugned office orders, the PEPCO authorities have mentioned any exigency which would have necessitated such transfers and postings of 27 engineers. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are deprived of their fundamental rights either to be given promotions as per policy in spite of lapse of 10 years period, which has been determined by PEPCO authorities whereafter the case of the petitioners is required to be considered for promotion from BPS-17 to 18. It has been further stated that in order to deprive the candidates holding the domicile of Sindh from their recruitment and promotion to BPS-17 on the vacant posts, such transfers and postings are made to fill such vacancies whereas such vacancies are created in LESCO, GEPCO and IESCO against such vacant posts, as in most of the cases the persons who are transferred to SEPCO are subsequently absorbed and their lien is cancelled from their parent Department. In this regard learned counsel for the petitioner has cited an instance in the case of respondent No.XII Samiullah Naveed, who according to learned counsel, has been absorbed after his transfer from LESCO in SEPCO. It has been further alleged that even the policy is not being implemented fairly as there has been hardly any occasion when the engineers of SEPCO would have been transferred and posted to other Departments i.e. LESCO, GEPCO and IESCO, which has created sense of insecurity amongst the employees of SEPCO.

Such averments made by the learned counsel for the petitioners have been disputed by the counsel representing SEPCO, who is duly assisted by Sattar Bux Soomro, Manager (Legal) and Deepak Kumar DM (HR) SEPCO, Sukkur. It has been stated by Mr.David Lawrence that neither such transfer/posting is based on mala fide nor the incumbents who have been transferred and posted subject to impugned orders will be permanently absorbed in SEPCO as it is evident from the office orders that such appointments have been made merely on temporary basis to meet the exigency. It has been further stated that their lien is still maintained in their parent Department and it is mentioned in the impugned order that they will be repatriated to their parent Department as per policy.

From perusal of PEPCO policy, it appears that unless there is some request from the borrowing Department i.e. SEPCO, such transfers and postings cannot be made except transfer on administrative grounds. Learned counsel representing SEPCO has candidly stated that the impugned transfers have not been made on administrative grounds and have been made pursuant to relevant provision of SEPCO transfer policy as referred to hereinabove, however, when the learned counsel for the respondents and the learned DAG were confronted as to whether there is any request on behalf of SEPCO pointing out the exigency requiring the transfer-posting of such engineers to SEPCO from various Departments i.e. LESCO, GEPCO and IESCO have failed to point out any such request on behalf of SEPCO. At this juncture, Ameer Ahmed Shaikh advocate has shown appearance and submits that he has been informed on telephone that learned counsel representing PEPCO authorities Ms Gul Naz Firdous could not reach the Court due to some personal exigency, would like to assist this Court on behalf of PEPCO. Learned DAG has also made such request and submits that the matter may be adjourned to some other date so that he may seek instructions and call comments from Controlling authority i.e. respondent No.II PEPCO as well as Secretary, Water and Power, Government of Pakistan.

As an indulgence we are adjourning these matters to 17.05.2016, to be taken up at 11-00 a.m, however, with caution that if no comments are filed on behalf of respondents, we will dispose of instant petitions on the basis of available record in accordance with law on the next date of hearing.

Notices may be repeated to private respondents, to be served through SEPCO as well as LESCO.

JUDGE

JUDGE

N.M.