2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J‑‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from judgment dated 4‑1‑2002, passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in Service Appeal No.3226 of 2000.

2. The petitioner while posted as Police Inspector in District Sahiwal was proceeded against departmentally for grave misconduct for using stolen/custom evaded car and displaying a fake registration number of the vehicle. The reply of the petitioner to the show‑cause notice issued by the departmental authority was found unsatisfactory.. He was awarded the major penalty of compulsory retirement from service by order dated 21‑6‑2000 passed by the Deputy Inspector‑General of Police, Multan Range.. A criminal case F.I.R. No.119 of 2000, dated 21‑4‑2000 was also registered at Police Station, Old Anarkali, Lahore, under sections 420, 468 & 471 P.P.C. in respect of the same vehicle. The petitioner filed a Regular Service Appeal No.3226 of 2000 before the Tribunal against the departmental penalty of compulsory retirement which was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 4‑1‑2002.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that no regular enquiry was conducted into the allegations against the petitioner. There were no cogent reasons to justify the imposition, upon the petitioner, of the major penalty of compulsory retirement from service. There was nothing on record to demonstrate that the petitioner had been using the non, custom paid vehicle displaying Registration No.LHW‑94" The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was already at the verge of his retirement who had rendered meritorious services to the police department for more than 29 years. The authorities‑ had no legal justification to register a criminal case in order to implicate the petitioner.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length. The record of the case shows that the vehicle in question, was spotted by Mr. Aftab Ahmad, Traffic Magistrate, Lahore, carrying a Police Sticker and a blue revolving light commonly used by the police. The Registration number of the vehicle with its chassis and engine were found to be fake. The Competent Authority found that the petitioner had put in 29 years of service who had outlived his utility, The Tribunal recorded finding of fact that the petitioner had failed to show that he was not concerned with the doubtful vehicle and that the situation was aggravated by his use .of the said vehicle and displaying the police signal, i.e., blue light on the same. It was further observed by the Tribunal that there was no mala fide on the part of Traffic Magistrate, Lahore, in the matter. The driver of the car when hauled up also disclosed that the vehicle in question belonged to the petitioner. The petitioner was rightly awarded the major penalty of compulsory retirement from service in terms of rule 4 (1) (a) & (b) of the Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975 as the holding of a regular enquiry was not necessary in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. No question of law of public importance is involved in this case so as to warrant any interference by this Court with the impugned judgment in terms of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic oil Pakistan.

5. For the foregoing reasons we do not find any merit in this petition and the same is dismissed accordingly. S.A.K./Z‑139/SC Petition dismissed