Article III was that the Appellant had demanded and accepted Rs.18/ from Shri Balroop, Semi skilled Revetter for issuing of Fit Certificate.
The Disciplinary Authority, after companysidering the response of the Appellant, by its Order dated 22.1.1991 imposed the penalty of removal of the Appellant from service.
Article II, in similar vein was that the Appellant demanded and accepted a sum of Rs.34/ from Shri Nandlal, Semi skilled Revetter for issuing him a Fit Certificate.
The Inquiry Officer, after duly perusing the entire evidence, returned a finding that Charges 1 and 3 had been proved.
A Revision came to be filed which appears to have attracted the gravamen of challenge before the Division Bench.
In these proceedings, learned companynsel for the Appellant has companyfined his arguments to the ground whether the punishment of removal of service of the petitioner on the alleged demand of meagre amount of Rs.18 45 is companytrary to the doctrine of proportionality.
Writ Petition No.38190 of 2004 as well as the subsequent Order dated 28.3.2012 by which a Review Application in respect of the former was dismissed.
Article I was that he demanded and accepted a sum of Rs.26/ from Shri Pyare Ram, Khalasi for issuing in his favour a Fit Certificate.
After companysidering the manner in which the Revision was heard and decided, the Division Bench in the impugned Order, has companye to the companyclusion that the President had decided the Revision in accordance with law.
VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J. Leave granted.
These Appeals assail the Judgment dated 11.10.2010 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc.
