MECON LIMITED Vs. BUDDHA PRASAD PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A very short issue arises in this appeal.

(2.) The respondent No.1 writ petitioner was (the respondent) handed down a punishment in disciplinary proceedings. It was removal from service. He alleged in the instant writ filed in this court [WP No. 11308(W) of 2010] (Shri Buddha Prasad Pal Vs. Mecon Limited and Ors.) inter alia that the punishment was disproportionate. The learned judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 3rd September, 2018 held that it was so and substituted this punishment with one of compulsory retirement from service. If this impugned judgment and order is implemented, the respondent would be entitled to leave encashment benefit. On removal of service this benefit is not given. It should be stated that except leave encashment, other benefits were released in favour of the respondent. The respondent has not preferred any cross-objection against this order. He is deemed to have accepted it. Only the employer, Mecon Limited has come up in appeal.

(3.) Therefore, the only question which arises in this appeal is whether the learned judge exercised his discretion correctly in imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement instead of removal from service as against the respondent?