ORDER

B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.-Leave granted.

Heard the counsel for the parties.

2. The respondent was an Assistant Accounts Officer in the service of the appellant-corporation. Two charges were framed against him and a disciplinary inquiry held.The first charge was that the respondent made certain false notings while recommending sanction of loans to certain persons to the effect that no loan was outstanding against them.On the basis of such false notings, loans were sanctioned to them, contrary to the rules. The second charge was that he failed to exercise proper control and supervision on the staff on account of which the relevant registers and record were not kept upto date. The inquiry officer reported that while charge no.1 is established, charge No. 2 is proved only partially.On the basis of the said report the respondent was dismissed from service, which he challenged by way of writ petition in the Orissa High Court. The High Court has allowed the writ petition holding: (a) the burden of proving the first charge rested with the department.The inquiry officer, however, has wrongly cast the burden of disproving the charge upon the respondent. The department must succeed on the str