1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, .J----The petitioner got a very minor dose of punishment. The Superintendent of Police, Faisalabad, awarded him punishment of reduction in pay by three stages by way of regular police proceedings as provided under the Punjab Police (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975. The period of suspension was to be treated as such. The aforesaid order was upheld in departmental appeal before the Deputy Inspector-General of Police and was confirmed by the Punjab Service Tribunal where the petitioner appealed after having exhausted departmental remedies and his appeal was dismissed by judgment dated 12-104985 by the Punjab Service Tribunal.
2. ' No doubt, according to the order of the Superintendent of Police, the tainted money of Rs,1,000 was not demanded by the petitioner as illegal gratification but the same was recovered from his possession. The petitioner being a member of the disciplined force, was not expected to pocket the same. He started his career on the corrupt foundation. May be that his superior officers as well as the Tribunal wanted to give him one more chance to improve himself to be an officer worthy of the force. The petitioner should be grateful for that otherwise we do not think that there was violation of any rule or that the petitioner was condemned unheard or that his case was not considered in accordance with law. Not a fit case for leave. 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.