1. ' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was a Constable in the Police Force. On the allegation that he had intentionally concealed the facts within his knowledge in a departmental inquiry relating to the death of a person by a head constable, he was served with a show-cause notice by the Superintendent of Police. He submitted a reply and was also heard in person. His explanation was found unsatisfactory and he was dismissed from service. He filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police but without any success. He filed a representation before the Inspector- General of Police but that too failed. He then preferred an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. This was dismissed on the ground of limitation. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. Before the Tribunal the petitioner sought condonation of delay by claiming credit for the time he had spent in pursuing his representation before the I.-G. The learned Tribunal declined to give him allowance for the said purpose. Considering that the order of the D.I.-G. On his appeal was final and that no representation lay to I.-G. As a matter of right we can find no legal error in the view taken by the learned Tribunal. The petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.