2010L2024 (PLP)

KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, C.J.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has submitted an application to the Chairman, Federal Board of. Revenue, Islamabad against Ali Suleman Abbasi, Collector Custom, Lahore but no order was passed by the Chairman and instead of that Ali Suleman Abbasi against whom the application was given, he started inquiry from the hand of his subordinate; that subordinate of Ali Suleman Abbasi namely Abdul Basit, Additional Collector, Custom conducted the inquiry which has been placed on the file of amended petition at pages 30 to 34 and the finding of said Abdul Basit is as under:-- "Absence of evidence and circumstances prove that the contents of the complaint/letter by Shah Jahan Dogar, cannot be confirmed, therefore, it is found to be baseless."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred Annexure "VII" purportedly an application given by the present petitioner to Collector Customs, Model Customs Collectorate, Customs House, Lahore and submits that this is forged application and it was never given by the petitioner. Learned counsel has referred page 35 of the petition and submits that this application is in the hand of the petitioner. Learned counsel has also referred to paragraph 7 at page 20 and submits that at the time of ex-bonding of goods on 23-7-2008 the goods were once again provisionally assessed at US$ 1000/MT on the basis of an irrelevant/non -applicable Valuation Advice No.56 of 2008 dated 9-5-2008; that petitioner has no other remedy except to file this petition after he is terminated/removed from the service then he has got remedy in the department. Learned counsel submits that the matter has been inquired by that law which has been repealed; that date of repeal is 17-10-2006 while petitioner was charged in 2009 under the law which is not in the field having been repealed. He has also referred pages 22 and 23 to show-cause notice under the repeal law. Learned counsel also submits that request of the petitioner was that an independent forum should inquire into the request of the petitioner for inquiry against Ali Suleman Abbasi, Collector Custom, Lahore. He also submits that petitioner was also served an addendum through Omar Arshad Hakeem Advocate, High Court. Lastly submits that request of the petitioner is that complaint lodged by him should be inquired into not by subordinate of Ali Suleman Abbasi but by some body from Federal Board of Revenue who must be superior of the above said Ali Suleman Abbasi.

3. Learned Legal Advisor for Custom Department takes the preliminary objection about the maintainability of this petition and relied upon 1985 SCMR 63 relevant at page 65 and submits that petitioner has got an alternate remedy and he can approach Federal Service Tribunal; that all the applications which have been referred to above by learned counsel for the petitioner were made after his suspension and his suspension date is 24-7-2009; that although he was appraiser but was acting as principal appraiser by using his influence; that Collector Custom was given an application by one of importer that all the chemical consignment were charged at the rate of 2.60 to 2.75 but the present petitioner raised the same from 2.75 to 1000 and in this regard a lawyer of the said importer had submitted an application against the petitioner whereby the Collector Custom Lahore had issued addendum and Chief Collector Custom also inquired into the matter, that Federal Board of Revenue had summoned the petitioner twice but he did not appear and lastly he appeared on Saturday.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Without going into merit of the case I am of the opinion that petitioner was suspended by the Custom Department, an alternate remedy is available to him and he can file appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal as has been held in Muhammad Sadiq Khokhar v. Engineer in Chief Pakistan Army GHQ an another 1985 SCMR page

63. This writ petition is not maintainable in view of the above said judgment. This petition stands dismissed. H.B.T./S-243/L Petition dismissed.