' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, Lahore, dated 7-6-1988.
2. The petitioner was serving as a Naib-Qasid in the office of the District and Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, and was attached to the Additional District Judge, Rawalpindi. The murder case of the father of one Zahid Hussain was pending in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge where a complaint was lodged by him that the petitioner demanded Rupees sixty thousand as illegal gratification in the name of the Presiding Officer. On 6-11-1984 Zahid Hussain appeared before the trial Court and submitted an application to the effect that the petitioner has been receiving amounts from him in the account of the Additional Sessions Judge during the trial and ultimately asked to pay him Rupees sixty thousand if he wanted to get the assailants of his father convicted. Il he statement of the complainant was recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge and the same was forwarded to the Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, who appointed Mr. Muhammad Aslam, Civil Judge, 1st Class, Rawalpindi, to hold preliminary enquiry. A Charge Sheet with the statement of allegations dated 15-11-1984 was served upon the petitioner and Mr. Khalil Ahmad, Additional Sessions Judge, was appointed as an Inquiry Officer. The statement of the complainant, Zahid Hussain, was recorded and on its basis the petitioner was found guilty. The petitioner was informed of the outcome of the report and after affording him personal hearing the learned District and Sessions Judge dismissed him from service. The petitioner's departmental appeal was dismissed by Mr. Justice Muhammad Afzal Lone, Administrative Judge, vide order, dated 21-4-1986 and his appeal was dismissed by the Punjab Service Tribunal on 7-6-1988.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in detail and have gone through the record of the case.
4. Leave in this case is granted to consider whether a major penalty could be imposed upon the petitioner on the solitary statement of the complainant and also whether the law laid down by this Court in two judgments namely 1973 SCMR 455 and 1987 SCMR 1562 has been followed in this case. The appeal is to be fixed at an early date on the same record.
' Leave to .