IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 4747 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 4747 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 4747 OF 2008 Shri Joshi Sahadu Kama. ... Petitioner. V/s. The Commissioner, Pune Municipal Corporation & ors. ... Respondents. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5247 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 5247 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 5247 OF 2008 Shri Bharat Pandharinath Dhiwar. ... Petitioner. V/s. The Commissioner, Pune Municipal Corporation & ors. ... Respondents. N.C.Walimbe for the petitioners. R.S.Khadapkar for the respondents. CORAM: V.C.DAGA and CORAM: V.C.DAGA and CORAM: V.C.DAGA and MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED: 13th February 2009. DATED: 13th February 2009. DATED: 13th February 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- . Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused petition. 2. The petitioners, by these petitions, are challenging the punishment imposed pursuant to the departmental enquiry conducted against them. The said orders of punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority were affirmed in the departmental appeals. 3. During the course of hearing, we were taken through the chargesheet and reply. The reply is only four line reply. No detailed reply was given. No defence was set up against the charges framed. After framing charges, Enquiry Officer was appointed. He examined the witnesses, who were cross-examined by the delinquent employees/ petitioners. After giving full opportunity, the Enquiry Officer concluded enquiry and submitted report holding that the petitioners were guilty of the charges levelled against them. In spite of taking us through the entire record, learned counsel for the petitioners could not point out any breach of natural justice or perversity in the impugned order. The findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer are based on material available on record. 4. This Court not being a court of appeal is not expected to reappreciate the evidence once again and substitute the findings by its own findings. The findings or conclusions on questions of fact could hardly be re-examined or disturbed by the High Court since the decision rendered by the appropriate authority under the Act could not be interfered with under Article 226 unless the well-recognised tests in that behalf laid down in the case of Kisan Chand Kisan Chand Kisan Chand Narsingh Das Bhatia v. State Transport Appellate Narsingh Das Bhatia v. State Transport Appellate Narsingh Das Bhatia v. State Transport Appellate - 3 - Authority, Gwalior Authority, Gwalior Authority, Gwalior, (1968) 2 SCJ 797 are satisfied. 5. In petition under Article 226, High Court cannot disturb findings of fact unless there is error of law and order is shown to be perverse as held by the Apex Court in Natha Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Natha Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Natha Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Taxation , Punjab Taxation , Punjab Taxation , Punjab, AIR 1976 SC 1053; and Khazan Singh Khazan Singh Khazan Singh v. Hukam Singh v. Hukam Singh v. Hukam Singh, AIR 1977 SC 2032 (2039). 6. In the above view of the matter, no case is made out either on facts or law by the petitioners to interfere with the impugned orders. The petitions are devoid of substance. The view taken in the impugned orders is a reasonable and possible view. 7. In the result, both petitions are dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)