ABDUL GHAFOOR Versus MANAGER, FINANCE (WATER), WAPDA

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J. ‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by a WAPDA employee, who stands dismissed from service, against the dismissal of his appeal by the Federal Service Tribunal.

2. Learned counsel contended that: (i) the Tribunal after noting the arguments neither accepted nor rejected the submissions; (ii) that the proceedings shifted from an officer to the other to the prejudice of the petitioner; (iii) that due procedure was not observed during the enquiry; (iv) and that the charge including the temporary embezzlement, is not established against the petitioner.

3. There is no force in any of the submissions. Though the Tribunal applied mind to the arguments addressed from both sides, yet the treatment thereof is unorthodox. The judgment could have been more elaborate. However, no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner.

4. There was full application of mind to the arguments contemporaneously, when they were being noted in the impugned judgment. Substantial justice has been done.

5. The so‑called defects of procedure pointed out by the learned counsel either in the hearing offended to him by different persons including the appellate forum or during the enquiry which it seems was fair, do not vitiate the proceedings. The questions of the merit regarding proof of the charge, are not such so as to justify interference by this Court. As no question of law of public importance is involved, leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.

6. M.I./A‑286/S Petition dismissed.