' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment, dated 17th June, 2004 passed by Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore. Relevant paras therefrom read as under thus:- "(4) In this C.M. Application 293/2004, Mr. Shaukat Ali Khan has alluded to yet another of his Service Appeal No,1072 of 2003 dismissed by Chairman, Punjab Service Tribunal affirming the major penalty imposed by the authority in disciplinary proceedings launched against him, although its mention was totally desultory and had no remote nexus with the proceedings in Appeal 1108/2003, yet by raking up a closed and past transaction, has spoken his mind of giving vent to the vemon entertained, without any basis, on the dismissal of the appeal on merits. Both the applications (293/2004 and 488/2004) are dismissed accordingly.
(5) A copy of the C.M. Application 293/2004 be sent by the Registrar of this Tribunal to the Chief Secretary, Government of the Punjab and Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Agriculture Department for contemplating to initiate disciplinary proceedings against Shaukat Ali Khan, EADA (E&M), Sheikhupura as the contents of the said application constitute prima facie misconduct."
2. Learned counsel contended that by filing Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 293 and 488 of 2004 before the Punjab Service Tribunal, petitioner has not committed misconduct in any manner because it was his right to express his view point before the Tribunal and merely for such reason, Service Tribunal may have not directed to the respondent-department for initiating action against him.
3. In response to notice, Raja Abdul Rehman, learned Assistant Advocate-General appeared and conceded that after having dismissed above noted civil miscellaneous applications, filed by petitioner, the Tribunal may have not directed the department for initiating action of misconduct against the petitioner.
4. In view of above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the relevant provisions of law on the subject, we are of the opinion that by moving applications, the petitioner has not committed misconduct in any manner, falling within the ambit of Government Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1973 and Service Tribunal may have kept before it relevant law, before making such directions to the Provincial Government for taking action against him.
' Thus for the foregoing reasons, petition is converted into appeal and allowed, as a result whereof the observations of the Service Tribunal directing the Provincial Government to take action against the petitioner of committing misconduct, are set aside.