JUDGMENT :- Leave granted.

2. By consent of learned counsel for both parties, these appeals are taken up for final disposal.

3. The short question is whether the appellant who was working as Sorting Assistant under the Respondents organisation could have been dismissed from service only because he was alleged to be unauthorisedly absent from 9-1-1985 to 15-1-1985. When he tried to resume his duties thereafter, he was placed under suspension on 16-1-1985 and after a departmental enquiry, was dismissed from service. He went to the Tribunal. The Tribunal took the view that the punishment meted out to the appellant was grossly disproportionate but could not interfere in exercise of its jurisdiction. That is how the appellant is before us on grant of special leave.

4. In our view, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the punishment of dismissal from service is too harsh and on the contrary it is required to be substituted by appropriate lesser punishment. Learned counsel for the respondents after instructions has stated that appropriate lesser punishment may be awarded by this Court. It will be acceptable to the respondents. In our view, ends of justice will be served if we set asid