P.N. RAVINDRAN, J.

1. The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.17786 of 2014, wherein he had challenged Ext.P4 show cause notice dated 10.7.2007, issued by the second respondent calling upon him to show cause why the penalty of “removal from service” shall not be imposed on him in terms of Regulation 39(1)(f) of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 (for short “the Regulations”). By judgment delivered on 11.12.2017, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

2. The appellant entered service in the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as “the LIC” for short) on 1.2.1986 as a Development Officer. He was later promoted as Assistant Manager (Sales). While he was working as Assistant Branch Manager (Sales) in the Kalpetta Branch of the LIC, the second respondent issued and served on him Ext.P1 memo of charges dated 8.2.2002. The charges levelled against the appellant in Ext.P1 memo of charges read as follows:

“1. That while you were working as Development Officer, code No.86076 in Kunnamkulam Branch under Ernakulam Division during the period from 1986 to 1988, Sri P.K.Ummer was appointed as an LIC Agent under you vide agency code no.1328799 on your introduction and recommendation on 18.07.86. However, you canvassed the policies in the name of Sri P.K.Ummer without his knowledge and concurrence by forging the agent's signature in the proposal forms, agent's confidential report, etc. in respect of the policies mentioned in Annexure I while Sri P.K.Ummer was in India.

2. That you entered into a criminal conspiracy with Shri T.S.Dharmarajan, Assistant, S.R.No.553239, Kunnamkulam Branch Office under Ernakulam Division during the period from 1986 to 1998 and alongwith Shri T.S.Dharmarajan canvassed policies in the name of Shri P.K.Ummer, LIC Agent, Code no.1328799 without his knowledge and concurrence by forging the agent's signature in some or all of the proposal forms, agent's confidential reports, moral hazard reports, etc. in respect of the policies mentioned in Annexure II while Shri P.K.Ummer was in India and even after departure of Shri P.K.Ummer to Sharjah on 19.04.89.

3. That while you were working as a Development Officer, Kunnamkulam Branch under Ernakulam Division, you had colluded with one Shri T.S.Dharmarajan, Assistant, Kunnamkulam Branch Office under Ernakulam Division to secure new business under policies given in Annexure III under the agency of P.K.Ummer, LIC Agent, Code no.1328799 and had perpetrated fraud on LIC by cheating the Corporation by introducing NB in a unlawful manner and gained pecuniary advantage for yourself by way of receiving ACA, IB etc. resulting in excess payment to you to the tune of Rs.10,593.44 by way of ACA and Rs.40,043.74 by way of IB from LIC knowingly well that an LIC employee should not canvass business and that it should be done only by an authorised agent.

4. That agency application for allotment of agency in the name of Shri P.K.Ummer has been written by you in your own handwriting and you have connived and/or connived with Shri T.S.Dharmarajan in canvassing policies in the name of Shri P.K.Ummer leading to the agency of Shri P.K.Ummer being run as a benami agency.”

3. By Ext.P1, the appellant was called upon to state in writing within a period of 15 days from the date of the receipt of chargesheet as to whether he admits the charges. The appellant submitted a reply dated 26.2.2002 denying the charges levelled against him. The disciplinary authority, after considering his reply, decided to enquire into the charges and consequently appointed Sri T.S.Ramanujam, Manager (F&A), Divisional Office, Ernakulam, as the Enquiry Officer. After enquiry, the said enquiry officer submitted a report dated 15.3.2005 holding the appellant guilty of the charges levelled against him. After a copy of the enquiry report was furnished to the appellant and his reply was received, the disciplinary