' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- This petition is directed against judgment, dated 16-2-2000 passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Appeal No,657 of 1999.
2. The petitioner, while posted as A.S.-I. Of police at Police Station Jalalpur Jattan, District Gujrat, was proceeded against for misconduct. The petitioner, in his reply, denied the allegations of the show-cause notice. The petitioner was afforded personal hearing on 15-11-1997 by respondent No,1 during the course of which other police officials, who had been summoned at the request of the petitioner, appeared and confirmed the allegations and their earlier statements against him made to the S.H.O. They stated that at the time of surprise raid by the S.H.O. The petitioner was found at a place other than the place of duty and that he was recalcitrant and not in his proper frame of mind seemingly under the influence of liquor. The respondent No,1, by order dated 17-11-1997 dismissed the petitioner from service under the Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. The appeal and revision of the petitioner were also rejected by the respondents Nos.2 and 3 respectively by orders dated 11-7-1998 and 2-3-1999. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred Appeal No,657 of 1999 which was dismissed by the Tribunal, by the impugned judgment dated 16-2-2000.
Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the facts and circumstances of the case required a regular inquiry to be conducted through an Inquiry Officer and that the entire disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner were in violation of Rule 6 of the Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline), Rules, 1975. The learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of Inspector-General of Police, Police Headquarters Office, Karachi and 2 others v. Shafqat Mehmood 2003 SCM R 207 in support of his submissions.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length. We find that the Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that the petitioner A was absent from duty at police picket at the time of raid by the S.H.O. The Tribunal also observed that the respondent No 1, summoned the other police officials on the insistence of the petitioner, who deposed against him, in his presence. It was found that the charge against the petitioner was not an outcome of any prejudice against him but was factual and correct one. The petitioner had also been personally heard by the respondents Nos.2 and 3 during the appeal and revision. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with concurrent findings of fact or the quantum of punishment as recorded by the departmental authorities and the Tribunal. The case of Shafqat Mehmooa, (supra) referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner is distinguishable as it involved different facts. This is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal. No substantial question of law of public importance is involved 'in this case. The impugned judgment does not suffer from any legal infirmity.
5. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition and the same is dismissed accordingly.