' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner was a constable on the establishment of the Superintendent of Police at Okara. On the allegation that at the time of joining service he had produced a certificate in which his date of birth had been tampered with, he was served with a show-cause notice. He submitted a written reply and was also heard in person by the Superintendent of Police.
His explanation was found unsatisfactory and he was dismissed from service. He preferred an appeal before the Deputy Inspector-General which was dismissed. He made a representation to the Inspector-General of Police but this was also filed. He then preferred an appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. It was dismissed on the ground of limitation. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. Under rule 14(5) the Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, the order made by the Deputy Inspector-General on the appeal of the petitioner was final. Consequently, the time for filing the appeal before the Tribunal started running against him from the date the order of the Deputy Inspector-General was conveyed to him. It is not disputed that he did not prefer the appeal before the Tribunal within the prescribed period. However, he sought condonation for the delay by claiming allowance for the time he had spent in pursuing his representation before the Inspector- General. The learned Tribunal declined his prayer and refused to condone the delay. We do not find that the view taken by the learned Tribunal in this regard suffers from any infirmity. The petition is dismissed.