1. ' ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--This is the second round of litigation brought by the petitioner before this Court; the first one being C.P.LA. No,218-K of 1978 which was dismissed by the judgment dated 12-8- 1979. The facts of the case briefly stated are as follows:- ' Petitioner joined service of respondent Corporation as Peon in 1967 and then rose to the post of Technical Librarian. On 20-4-1978 he was served with a show-cause notice followed by a charge- sheet wherein the following acts of misconduct were alleged against him:
(a) That the photocopy of the provisional Matriculation and Marks Sheet submitted by you to the Corporation have been found forged.
(b) That the copies of the certificate submitted by you certifying you to have qualified Librarianship Examination have also been found forged.
(c) That on your application dated 10-4-1978 you have fraudulently affixed the signature of Mr. S.A.
2. Rasool, Chief Librarian, Technical Librarian, Technical Library which as a matter of fact he never signed.
(d) That you submitted false information with regard to your educational certificates, experience and date of birth to the Corporation vide your application dated 19-4-1972.
(e) That you have also falsely stated your date of birth as 31-12-1941 in your employment application whereas the same was 31-12-45."
3. ' When subsequently enquiry officer was appointed to hold the departmental inquiry against petitioner he challenged the proceedings in a civil suit which was however dismissed on 20-5-1978.
4. There was a course of litigation thereafter, suffice to mention that during these proceedings petitioner was dismissed from service by the order dated 20-12-1978. He filed a grievance petition under Section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance in the Labour Court which too was dismissed. His challenge to this order before the Sind Labour Appellate Court also failed and his appeal was dismissed by order dated 9-8-1982. It was in these circumstances that the petitioner filed the Constitutional Petition in the High Court which was dismissed by the impugned judgment.
5. After having heard the petitioner in support of the petition and having gone through the record of the case, we find that all the pleas raised by the petitioner in support of this petition have already been examined in detail by the High Court and rejected for very cogent and proper reasons. We, therefore, find no merit in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed.