S PAULRAJ Vs. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved against the order of the 2nd respondent dtd. 10/1/2017. The 2nd respondent, through the impugned order dtd. 10/1/2017 imposed punishment of pension cut of Rs.300.00 per month for a period of ten years and for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,93,065.00, being the monetary loss caused to the fair price shops.

(2.) The following are the short facts which necessitated the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

(3.) The respondents filed a counter affidavit and opposed the writ petition. The crux of the contentions raised by the respondents is that the report of the Enquiry Officer and his findings are advisory in nature and are not binding on the disciplinary authority who can disagree with them and come to his own view based on assessment of the evidence forming part of the record of enquiry. Thus, it is contended by the respondent that the disciplinary authority, if disagrees with the findings of the Enquiry Officer on any article of charge, will only have to record his own findings. It is further stated in the counter affidavit at paragraph No.14 as follows: