The penalty of dismissal must be proportionate to the misconduct proved, and reinstatement may be declined if the plaintiff has been long absent from the service.

( 1 ) THIS appeal by the plaintiff is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 28-2-1978 passed in O. S. No. 125/73 by the II additional civil judge, Bangalore city, the defendants also have filed cross objections. Thus, the appeal and the cross objections are considered together. Z the appeal arises out of a suit filed for a declaration that the order dismissing the plaintiff from service is wrongful and for award of damages in a sum of Rs. 25,000/ -. Originally the plaintiff claimed damages in a sum of rs. 75,000/ -. However, he confined the claim for damages to a sum of Rs. 25. 000/ -. The plaintiff also sought for a further direction to the defendants to pay interest to him on the amount of damages claimed at 6% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of decree and further interest at 6% per annum on the aggregate decree amount from the date of decree till realisation and costs of the suit. 3. it is not necessary to advert to the pleadings of the parties as the judgment of the court below refers to it in great details. It is sufficient to mention that the suit was resisted by the defendants od all the counts. In the plaint the plaintiff has specifically stated that he did not want to press the relief of reinstatement in view of the Provisions of Specific Relief Act. Therefore, he had filed the suit only for damages for wrongful dismissal. 4. The trial court framed the following issues for determination:- (1) whether the plaintiff proves that his order of dismissal from service of the defendant bank is wrongful? (2) whether the plaintiff proves that he is entitled to challenge the order of dismissal before this court? (3) whether the plaintiff establishes that he is entitled for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as damages? (4) what decree and relief? It answered issues 1 and 2 in the affirmative. On issue No. 3 it held that the plaintiff established that he was entitled to damages of only Rs. 1,995/ -. Accordingly, the trial court passed a decree declaring that the dismissal of the plaintiff by the first defendant-bank was wrongful; that the plaintiff was entitled to damages in a sum of Rs. 1995/- with future interest at 6% per annum from the date of the suit till realisation and awarded costs to the extent the suit was decreed. 4. 1. The plaintiff has come up in appeal being aggrieved by the fact that the damages awarded was not as prayed for by him in the plaint. The 1st defendant has filed the cross-objections because the dismissal has been held to be wrongful. 5. During the course of hearing, the appellant-plaintiff has filed an application under order vi Rule 17, C. P. C. seeking permission of the court to amend the plaint so as to include a prayer for reinstatement. He has also sought permission to delete certain portion of the plaint averments and also to add one para. The relevant portion of the said application is as follows: " that for the reasons sworn to in the accompanying affidavit, the applicant/appellant/plaintiff above named respectfully prays that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to permit him to amend the plaint/appeal and the prayer as follows in the interest of Justice and equity. "1. Amendment of the cause title: 'vijaya bank Ltd. , As vijaya bank (acquired under the banking companies acquisition and transfer of undertakings act), wholly owned and controlled by the government of India' presently having its administrative office at trinity circle, m. g. road, Bangalore.

( 2 ) TO delete the following portion in paragraph 14 of the plaint:"the plaintiff does not press the relief of reinstatement in view of the Provisions of Specific Relief Act. "

( 3 ) TO add as paragraph 14-a to the plaint/appeal:"the vijaya bank Ltd. , Was nationalised subsequently in the year 1980 and it is an authority as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. This being a statutory body the relief of reinstatement could be granted. "

( 4 ) AND to amend the prayer as"to direct the defendant bank to reins