' KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN, J.---The petitioner aggrieved from judgment dated 3-8-2011, passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Karachi, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), seeks leave to appeal.
2. Briefly stating the facts of the case are that the petitioner was charge sheeted twice on the allegation of misconduct and both the times, he was found guilty of the charges leveled against him by the enquiry committees constituted by the department. However, the authority i,e, Executive Director himself heard the petitioner at length and referred the matter for re-hearing to the authorized officer, who reported that the submissions made by the petitioner in his defence are unacceptable Thereafter, the authority i,e, Executive Director again provided the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, when he submitted his acceptance of the misconduct in writing and tendered an unconditional apology. Ultimately, the authority finding him guilty of the charges leveled against him imposed the major penalty of removal from service with immediate effect. His departmental appeal as well as service appeal failed, hence the present petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that a number of inquiries held against the petitioner and that the order of removal from service was passed on the basis of unconditional acceptance of his guilt of misconduct, which in fact was given by the petitioner on the assurance of the respondent that he will be exonerated from the charge leveled against him.
4. We have carefully gone through the record and have taken into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. From the perusal of record, it appears that the petitioner has not placed on record the document by, which he has accepted his guilt of misconduct despite opportunity was provided to him to do so on 8-12-2011. The respondent- department after providing opportunities of hearing to the petitioner, passed the impugned order of removal from service, on the basis of serious allegation of misconduct, which he himself admitted during the course of personal hearing by the Executive Director. This order has been upheld by the learned Tribunal, which in our considered view bases upon record and does not call for any interference by this Court.
5. Additionally, no question of law of public importance within the meaning of Article 212(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, has been pointed out.
6. Resultantly, the petition lacking in merit stands dismissed and leave to appeal refused.