K.K. KATHPALIA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with his assistance have gone through the record of the case.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that the impugned order Annexure P-6 is liable to be quashed on the ground of discrimination as the case of Shri R.C. Mittal, SDO was also on similar footing.

(3.) We are not in a position to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. K.K. Kathpalia, the present petitioner was directly responsible for the excess payment to the contractor and the finding of the punishing authority is that such payment has been made with a malafide intention in order to cause loss to the Government.