AJMER SINGH Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point urged at the hearing of the writ petition is that the penalty of compulsory retirement (which entitles the writ petitioner to receive pension) is grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the wrong. The extended limb of the argument is that for the same wrong others, such as HC Ramesh Sharma, Ct.Munshi Ram and Ct.Babu were inflicted with a punishment of either withholding increments or reduction by stages in the time scale of pay.

(2.) At the outset we may note that HC Ramesh Sharma,, Ct.Munshi Ram and Ct.Babu were held guilty in different incidents and have no commonality on facts with the indictment of the petitioner.

(3.) That a sum of Rs. 380/- was recovered from the possession of the petitioner when he completed duty at gate No.10 at 13:00 hrs. at the Weigh Bridge of NAPP Narora on March 19, 2003 is not disputed by the petitioner. He also does not dispute that office instructions required him not to carry, while on duty, a sum exceeding Rs. 10/- and record in the General Diary any amount in excess of the same which he was carrying.