AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI, J.

Heard learned Principal Additional Advocate General-1 on behalf of the appellants and learned counsel representing the private respondent.

2. The order dated 29.10.2013 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11598 of 2012 is the subject matter of appeal before this Court. The learned single Judge, after having given a considered opinion to the submissions and materials available, decided to quash Annexure-13 of the writ application dated 31.01.2012 by virtue of which the two punishments imposed upon the private respondent of withholding 100% pension and non-payment of salary for the period of suspension has been set aside. It is this reason that the State is aggrieved.

3. The facts are not a matter of dispute that the private respondent was arrested by a vigilance team for demanding a bribe of Rs.2,000/-. It is alleged that he was caught red handed with the money for which a Vigilance Case No. 11 of 2008 was instituted. The delinquent was arrested and later enlarged on bail, but the authorities decided to also hold a departmental proceeding against him and on conclusion of the departmental proceeding the order of punishment came to visit him.

4. The private respondent