THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.1716 of 2010 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) The State has questioned the order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, (for short “the Tribunal”), in O.A.No.8621 of 2005, dated 30-07- 2009. The 1st respondent herein, who is a retired Sub-Inspector, had questioned the punishment imposed in the disciplinary proceedings, whereby the punishment of reduction in time scale of pay by two stages for two years with cumulative effect was imposed against him. The Tribunal had considered the entire matter with reference to the records of the case and had noted that charge memo was issued on 23-06-1992 and the enquiry was initiated on 07-05-1992 under the then existing A.P.Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1963. The Tribunal agreed with the conclusion of the disciplinary authority with reference to proving of charge and recorded a finding that there is no illegality or irregularity in the order of the 3rd respondent in the O.A., finding the 1st respondent herein as guilty of charge. The Tribunal has also recorded a finding that there is sufficient evidence and there is no procedural irregularity. However to the extent of punishment, the Tribunal was of the view that imposing punishment of reduction in time scale of pay by two stages for two years with cumulative effect was not warranted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, and a lenient view was warranted. Accordingly, the Tribunal modified the said punishment of ‘reduction in time scale of pay by two stages for two years with cumulative effect’ to that of ‘reduction in time scale of pay by two stages for two years without cumulative effect’. Having heard both the counsel appearing on either side, we are unable to agree with the learned Government Pleader that the order of the Tribunal suffers from any perversity warranting correction by this court under our certiorari jurisdiction. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order is clearly sustainable and is not liable to be interfered with. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: 09-02-2010 Prv