' JAVED IQBAL, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against order dated 4-12-2001 passed by learned Single Bench of, Lahore High Court, Lahore, in the chambers whereby the writ petition on behalf of petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Precisely stated the facts of the case are that the services of the petitioner were terminated who was an employee of the Bank of Punjab. Being aggrieved a writ petition was preferred on behalf of petitioner which has been rejected vide order impugned with the following observations:-- "Petitioner was an employee of the respondent-Bank. His services have been terminated through the impugned order. Mainly such terminations have been challenged in the present petition.
2. Parawise comments were sought from the respondent wherein a preliminary objection has been taken. That present petition is not maintainable because the petitioner's services were not governed by any statutory rule. In this behalf reliance has been placed on the case reported as Arshad Ahmed v. Chairman Bank of Punjab Lahore (2000 PLC (C.S.) 1355).
3 . Confronted with the above, learned counsel for the petitioner by making reference to case reported as Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v. Nasir Jamal Mali and others (2001 SCMR 934) submits that the writ petition incompetent even if the statutory rules are not there.
4. I am afraid, this judgment has no relevance because the matter in the aforesaid judgment arises out of an order passed by the Service Tribunal and there is no question about the maintainability of the writ petition involved. The present case is squarely covered by the judgment reported as 2000 PLC (C.S.) 1355, as per whereof, writ against order of termination by the Punjab Bank was declared as incompetent.
' In the light of above, the petition is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed".
3. The conclusion as arrived at by the learned High Court revolves around the fact that the petitioner's services were not governed by any statutory rules and accordingly the writ petition was dismissed being not maintainable. The learned counsel when asked as to whether the services of petitioner were governed by any statutory rules, he attempted to built up his argument on the basis of "minutes of 52nd meeting of the Board of Directors" which by no stretch of imagination can be equated to that of "Statutory Rules". There is no denying the fact that the services of petitioner were not governed by any statutory rules and the dictum as laid down in Arshad Ahmad v.
Chairman Bank of Punjab Lahore (2000 PLC (C.S.) 1355 Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v.
Nasir Jamal Malik anti others (2001 SCMR 934), admittedly renders no assistance to the case of petitioner. No jurisdictional flaw or legal infirmity could be pointed out in the order impugned which being unexceptionable does not warrant any interference.
' The petition being meritless is dismissed.