' Petitioner, who is working as a Clerk in the Municipal Committee, Narowal, has filed this petition to challenge the charge-sheet dated 18th December, 1984 {{URDU TEXT}} (c.65-.)L.) which has been served on him and whereby he was called upon to submit his reply within seven days. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted reply to the aforesaid charge-sheet and the proceedings are now pending against him before respondent No, 2, who is the Authorised Officer under the Punjab Local Councils Servants (Efficiency and Discipline)
Rules, 1981. Petitioner, who is himself present in person, states that he has sent applications to the Authority for medical eave but according to his information, respondent No, 2 is proceeding with the ex- pane inquiry. He, however, admits that final orders have not been passed.
2. ##TS# # As the matter is still pending before the relevant authorities and final order has not been passed, this petition is premature should join the inquiry proceedings and put up whatever defence is available to him. ##TE# #
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying on rule 2 (3) of the aforementioned Efficiency and Discipline Rules, contends that both the Chairman of the Municipal Committee and the Chief Officer, respondents Nos, 1 and 2 herein, who are respectively 'Authority' and 'Authorised Officers' are inimical towards the petitioner in so far as the petitioner had initiated proceedings in contempt against them which are still pending in this Court. He, therefore, submits that both these officers being personally interested in the result of the proceedings, they are not competent to proceed with the inquiry against the petitioner. ##TS# # Petitioner may take this objection also before the concerned authorities, who will, of course decide it according to law.
' As held above, this petition is premature and the same is, therefore, disposed of accordingly with the aforementioned observations.