ORDER

Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and order of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Shimla made on August 12, 1996 in TA No. 755/86. The respondent-conductor was found to have not issued the tickets to the passengers. As a result, an enquiry was conducted on an initiation by the head of the office, one Mr. K.N. Uppal, Assistant Manager. The enquiry report was submitted to the Divisional Manager who accepted the report and removed the respondent from service. The respondent filed a civil suit which was dismissed by the trial Court. When the appeal was pending, the Tribunal came to be constituted. Accordingly, the appeal was transmitted to the Tribunal. The Tribunal 2504, in the impugned order, has held that the Assistant Manager has no jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the delinquent and, therefore, the entire action taken is vitiated by manifest error of law. Accordingly, it quashed the order of dismissal. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

3. It is seen that the statutory power has been exercised by the Corporation exercising power under Himachal Road Transport