C.W.P No. 8261 of 2009 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No. 8261 of 2009 Date of decision : May 27, 2009 Sanjeev Mehra, ...... Petitioner (s) v. State of Haryana and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Dinesh Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet (Annexure P-2), the show cause notice (Annexure P-4), the inquiry report (Annexure P-5), the order dated 30.6.2008 (Annexure P-8), removing the petitioner from service, as well as the order dated 24.3.2009 (Annexure P- 9) whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner joined service as Sub Inspector with the respondent department on 22.3.1996. As the petitioner committed negligence/irregularities, he was charge-sheeted on 2.12.2005. He filed reply denying allegations levelled against him. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report and found the petitioner guilty of the charges levelled C.W.P No. 8261 of 2009 ::2:: against him. Thereafter, a show cause notice along with the inquiry report was served upon him and after considering his reply, the disciplinary Authority passed the impugned order of removal from service. I find that the impugned orders are reasoned orders wherein all aspects of the matter have been considered. It is well known that judicial review in such matters is extremely restricted. In the case of Union of India and another vs S.S.Ahluwalia, 2007(7) SCC 257, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows :- “.... The scope of judicial review in the matter of imposition of penalty, as a result of disciplinary proceedings, is very limited. The Court can interfere with the punishment only if it finds the same to be shockingly disproportionate to the charges found to be proved. In such a case, the Court is to remit the matter to the disciplinary authority for reconsideration of the punishment. In an appropriate case, in order to avoid delay the court can itself impose lesser penalty......” I have not been able to persuade myself that the action of the respondents is shockingly disproportionate to the charges found to be proved, viz diversion of wheat to be supplied to BPL families and selling it in the open market. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( AJAY TEWARI ) May 27, 2009. JUDGE `kk' C.W.P No. 8261 of 2009 ::3::