PESHAWAR, Sept 3: The Peshawar High Court on Wednesday ordered to maintain status quo in two writ petitions filed by district nazims of Karak and Buner challenging transfers of government officials without their consent by the provincial government.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Hamid Farooq Durrani and Justice Syed Mussadiq Hussain Gillani sought comments from respondents in the petitions filed by Karak Nazim Rehmat Salam Khattak and Buner Nazim Abdur Rauf.

The respondents in the petition of the Karak nazim are NWFP Chief Minister Ameer Haider Khan Hoti, provincial secretary for works and services and the chief engineer of the public health engineering department.

The petitioner has challenged the transfer of sub-engineer Azizur Rehman by the chief engineer on directives of the chief minister from Takht-i-Nusrathi to Banda Daud Shah.

Advocate Asthagfirullah Khan appeared for the petitioner and contended that the transfer order was issued by the chief engineer on May 14 and two days later the chief minister issued a notification wherein he stated that the officer was transferred on his order and nobody should interfere in it.

He contended that since the sub-engineer was in BPS 11, therefore, under the Local Government Ordinance, 2001, he could not be transferred by the provincial government and only the district administration could transfer him. For the same reason, he added, the nazim cancelled the said order.

Mr Khan stated the chief engineer again issued the transfer order of the sub-engineer and also sought explanation from him why he had not followed the earlier order. He alleged that the sub-engineer’s transfer was a case of political victimisation because he had been transferred at the behest of an MPA of the area, Malik Mohammad Qasim.

The counsel said that under section 31 and 191 of the NWFP Local Government

Ordinance, the provincial government had to frame rules of business for smooth running of affairs of the district.

He added that under the said sections, the NWFP Local Government Rules were framed in 2001.

The petitioner contended that under Rule 25, a schedule was given wherein details were given about the authority that could transfer an official in the district. According to the schedule, he added, an official of BPS 11 could only be transferred by the district administration.