1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2474 OF 2007 Sagarmal Gujrathi. ..Petitioner. V/s. The Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer(D) ..Respondent. Mr.Rajesh Gehani for petitioner. Mr.T.J.Pandian for respondent. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : JANUARY 25, 2008. DATE : JANUARY 25, 2008. DATE : JANUARY 25, 2008. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. Notice was issued in this matter as the petitioner had pressed only one argument that the punishment awarded to him was excessive and disproportionate. 2. Pursuant to the notice, the Respondent has caused appearance. Counsel for the Respondent submits that cogent reasons have been recorded by the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal in Order dated 27th April, 2007. Having regard to those reasons, as recorded in paragraphs- 11 and 12 of the said Order, no interference is warranted. Learned Counsel also placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of The Govt. of A.P. & Ors. V/s. Mohd. The Govt. of A.P. & Ors. V/s. Mohd. The Govt. of A.P. & Ors. V/s. Mohd. 2 Taher Ali reported in 2007(8) Supreme 132. Taher Ali reported in 2007(8) Supreme 132. Taher Ali reported in 2007(8) Supreme 132. 3. In my opinion, argument of the Respondent will have to be accepted. No interference is warranted having regard to the well reasoned view taken by the Tribunal which is supported by the record. Hence dismissed. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)