' M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.--- The petitioner, Muhammad Boota an Ex-Storeman, Engineers Stores Depot (E.S.D.) Lahore Cantonment, Lahore through this petition under Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 7-7-2000, passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Lahore dismissing his Appeal No,392(L) of 1998.
2. On 23-4-1995, a raid was conducted in a shop of a civilian in Badami Bagh, Lahore and certain articles, stolen from the E.S.D., were recovered from it. A fact-finding inquiry was held and the petitioner was charge-sheeted for the misappropriation of the Stores. The allegations were denied by the petitioner. A show-cause notice was issued on 1-12-1997, which was replied by the petitioner on 15-12-1997. The petitioner was discharged from service; vide order, dated 22-12-1997, on account of misappropriation of M.T. Stores. The departmental appeal dated 15-1-1998 was rejected through order, dated 18-4-1998. The petitioner's appeal as mentioned above, was dismissed by Federal Service Tribunal on 7-7-2000, after examination of the record and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the departmental representative.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the charge of misappropriation was not proved and the major penalty of discharge from service is harsh and excessive. The learned counsel has also tried to show us certain documents, to contend that the goods confiscated from the shop were returned to the shop owner and in fact no misappropriation took place. No such plea was taken before the Tribunal at the time of hearing of appeal. The forums below have concurrently held that the charge of misappropriation of M.T. Stores was proved against the petitioner, which finding of fact does not warrant any interference by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 212(3), of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
4. In view of the above-mentioned, we find no merit in this petition. Even otherwise, no substantial question of law of public importance is involved. The petition is, therefore, dismissed and the leave is refused.