NITYANANDA NAIK Vs. PARADIP PORT TRUST AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We find that this is a case in which the punishment imposed upon the appellant is wholly disproportionate to the charge said to have been proved against him. We think that even if the charge levelled against the appellant is well-founded, the punishment of dismissal is excessive and the fact that he has been out of job from 17th Aug., 1981 upto date should be quite sufficient punishment for him. We do not propose to go behind the finding that the charge has been established against the appellant because that is a finding of fact, but we think the ends of justice require that the order dismissing the appellant from service should be set aside and he should be immediately reinstated with continuity in service but without back wages for the period from 17th Aug., 1981 upto the date of reinstatement. The appellant shall report for duty at the office of the respondents on 8th Feb., 1982 and he shall be reinstated in his original post forthwith. The respondent will pay the costs of the appellant fixed at Rs. 1,000.00.