DECISION The appellant was employed as a Senior Technician with the P.IA. He came to be involved along- with some other person or persons, in a case of gold smuggling, and was issued a charge-sheet on 6-3-1989. After a hearing by the Chairman he was dismissed from service on 24-7-1989.
2. He had filed a petition before the Labour Court which came to be dismissed. An appeal preferred before the Tribunal met with the same fate.
3. However a criminal case he was facing before the Special Judge (Customs and Taxation) ended in his acquittal, as per judgment dated 14-5-1991. Treating it as a fresh cause of action, the appellant had filed a fresh petition before the Labour Court which came to be dismissed culminating in this appeal.
4. The I.R.O. Envisages only one grievance notice followed by a petition before the Labour Court. This remedy had been sought earlier and in my humble opinion there will be no question of a fresh cause of action thereafter, as the matter had taken a finality.
5. Mr. M.M. Jeelani learned counsel for the appellant has however referred me to the case of Muhammad Rafique v. State reported in 1982 SCMR page 1047.
6. It appears from the judgment that the petitioner had been removed from service after the conviction and sentence by the Special Judge, Anti---Corruption. There was an appeal taken to the High Court, which was admitted, and he was ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. He had filed another application praying that the judgment of the Special Judge be suspended and he be deemed to continue in service which came to be dismissed by the High Court and later was dismissed by Supreme Court as well. .
7. I am afraid the case hardly lends any support to the contention of the learned counsel, and that is true also about the other citation namely General Manager, G.T.S. N.-W.F.P., Peshawar and another v. Rehmat Shah.
I will, therefore, dismiss the appeal in limine.