' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.--- The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from judgment dated 14-2- 2003, passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in Appeal No,716 of 1998.
2. The petitioner, Deputy District Education Officer (BS-17) was proceeded against by the Departmental Authorities while she was posted at Rahim Yar khan. The Director, Public Instruction (Elementary Education), Punjab, Lahore, being Authorized Officer, served her with a charge-sheet dated 18-6-1996, containing as many as four charges. The petitioner submitted her reply thereto controverting all the charges. As a result of inquiry and the recommendations of the Authorized Officer, the Secretary, Education Department Government of the Punjab, by order, dated 8-11-1997 awarded her penalty of reduction in time scale for a period of two years coupled with recovery of pecuniary loss amounting to Rs,3, 02,851 caused to the Government Exchequer. The departmental appeal of the petitioner was not decided within time. Therefore, she preferred Appeal No,716 of 1998 which was dismissed by the Tribunal, by the impugned judgment dated 14-2-2003, with the modification of the penalty of reduction in time scale into stoppage of annual increments for four years. However, the penalty of recovery of Rs,3,02,851 was maintained. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the inquiry proceedings conducted against the petitioner suffered from serious legal infirmities and the same were violative of rule 7 of the Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. It was next contended that the action against the petitioner was taken by the Departmental Authorities in a discriminatory manner inasmuch as the other officers of the Education Department who had also purchased similar goods from the same firm and at the same rate were let off. It was lastly submitted that the School Management Committees were not functional at the relevant time. Therefore, the question of such committees being associated with the purchase of the material or goods for the schools did not arise.
4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Advocate-General, Punjab, argued that one Mst.
Shahnaz Akhter, Deputy District Education Officer (Women) Sadiqabad, District Rahimyar Khan was also proceeded against on similar charges whereupon she was also imposed major penalty of reduction of lower stage in her scale as well as recovery of Rs,1,50,000. Another Officer Muhammad Hussain Goraya, the then Deputy Education Officer (Male), Bahawalnagar, was also compulsorily retired from service with an additional penalty of recovery of Rs,4,42,000 on almost similar charges.
It was lastly submitted that the inquiry proceedings were conducted against the petitioner strictly in accordance with rules. The Inquiry Officer had recorded a finding of fact whereby the petitioner was found guilty of charge No,2 of having purchased substandard material from a firm of her choice without associating the School Management Committee.
' The Under Secretary of the Education Department present in Court =categorically stated that under the instructions of the Provincial Government, the School Management Committees were constituted and were functioning throughout the Province.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Advocate- General, Punjab. We have also perused the available record. The learned counsel failed to point out any irregularity or illegality in the conduct of inquiry proceedings by the Inquiry Officer. The Competent Authority had also issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner and had also afforded her an opportunity of personal hearing in the light of the findings of the Inquiry Officer and recommendations of the Authorized Officer. The Tribunal has already modified the penalty of her reduction in time scale by converting the same into stoppage of annual increments for four years along with recovery of Rs,3, 02,851. The Executive District Officer (Education), Rahimyar Khan, by letter dated 3-8-2004, addressed to the Deputy Registrar of this Court, has intimated that one Mst.
Shahnaz Akhter the then Deputy District Education Officer (Women), Sadiqabad, District A Rahimyar Khan, was also imposed major penalty of reducation of lower stage in her pay scale as well as recovery of Rs,1,50,000. The charge against the petitioner was proved at departmental level.
Ordinarily, we do not substitute our findings of fact for those recorded by the competent forum in the absence of any exceptional circumstances. The impugned judgment was not shown to be suffering from any legal infirmity so as to warrant interference by this Court. This petition does not involve any substantial question of law of public importance as envisaged by Article 212(3) of the Constitution. Even otherwise, this is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.