MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment of the Central Service Tribunal dated 8-10-1986; whereby service appeal of the respondent against his removal from service under section 17(1-A) of the WAPDA Act, 1958, was allowed. Learned counsel has contended that the case of the respondent did not fall under either of the three categories of cases in which the Tribunal can interfere, as held, by this Court in WAPDA and another V: Muhammad Arshad Qureshi 1986 SCMR 18, therefore, the impugned judgment merits interference. The action taken by the WAPDA against the respondent was almost the same as taken against one Muhammad Arshad. His appeal was also allowed by the Tribunal and the petition for leave to appeal by the present petitioner, was dismissed by this Court on 14th December, 1985. See Water and Power Development Authority v. Muhammad Rashid 1986 SCMR 588.
2. Learned counsel agreed that there is no distinguishing feature between the two cases. That being so, there is no alternative but to refuse leave to appeal in this case as well. The petition accordingly is dismissed.