' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 21st October, 2000 passed by Federal Service Tribunal, Islamabad whereby appeal filed by petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that petitioner remained absent without leave from duty for two years w,e,f, 15th October, 1995 to 26th, September, 1997 as she left Pakistan for Behrain.
Subsequent thereto she again absented herself from duty w,e,f, 1st September, 1998 to 31st August, 1999 after applying for one year extraordinary leave. As such, vide show-cause notice dated 15th June, 1999, she was called upon to explain as to why major penalty of dismissal from service may not be imposed upon her on account of her wilful absence from duty. Ultimately, competent authority concluded that her absence from duty was wilful as without getting sanctioned Ex- Pakistan leave, she left her duty. As such vide letter/order dated 1st December, 1999, petitioner was removed from service under para. 4(b)(iii) of Government Servants (E&D Rules), 1973. Against such orders, after availing departmental remedy, she preferred service appeal before Federal Service Tribunal, which has been dismissed vide order dated 21st October, 2000. As such instant petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner contented that as No-Objection Certificate (NOC) was granted to petitioner to avail ex-Pakistan leave, therefore, presumption would be that competent authority had also sanctioned/granted leave in her favour.
4. We are not impressed with the arguments so raised by learned counsel for the petitioner because according to the Revised Leave Rules, 1980, the leave in favour of a person is duly sanctioned after having taken into consideration his/her leave account and if there is no leave found on his/her account, he/she would be entitled for leave without pay and on coming to such conclusion formula laid down under Rule 5 and Rule 9 is to be followed. Therefore, if a Government Officer, without getting sanctioned leave in his/her favour, leaves the department, he/she does so at his/her own risk and in such situation, the presumption would be that he/she is absent from the duty. The Federal Service Tribunal, while discussing all these aspects of the case has rightly concluded that as the petitioner absented herself from the duty for a sufficient long period without getting sanctioned leave in her favour, therefore, she was rightly found guilty for major penalty of dismissal from service.