' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was a Line-Superintendent under the respondent-Authority and was at the relevant time posted in Bhera Sub-Division. There were allegations against him that he had given electricity connection in a village without authority. He was served with a charge- sheet and called upon to furnish his explanation. The petitioner submitted his written statement which was not found satisfactory by the Department. By way of disciplinary action a direction was given that he should revert to the lower post of Line-Superintendent-II for a period of three years.
He filed a representation against the penalty imposed upon him but without any success. He filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal but that too failed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed before us that the petitioner had given electricity connection to the village without permission of the competent authority. His case however is that he had done so under the verbal orders of the Sub-Divisional Officer. It may be mentioned that the Sub-Divisional Officer was also proceeded against departmentally but was found innocent.
3. The sole question before us is if in giving electricity connection to the village the petitioner had acted under the orders of the Sub-Divisional Officer. It was one of fact. Apparently, the Sub- Divisional Officer has not supported the petitioner's assertion. However, that may be, the contention of the petitioner before us does not raise any substantial question of law of public importance.
Leave is refused.