The punishment awarded must be proportionate to the charges proved, and the court may interfere if the punishment is found to be disproportionate.

( 1 ) HEARD counsel for the parties.

( 2 ) THIS petition is directed against an order of removal dated 31. 8. 1991 and also the appellate order dated 184. 2001 rejecting - the resultant appeal of the petitioner.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that a statutory revision lies against the impugned orders and in fact the petitioner has alleged that he had preferred the revision on 24. 5. 2001. therefore the petition is not maintainable. The respondents in their counter affidavit have denied that any memo of revision was received by the competent authority. The appeal of the petitioner was decided after about a decade of the removal order. This petition has remained pending for the last about 4 years and pleadings have been exchanged between the parties thus. on these facts it would not be appropriate to throw out the petition on the ground of alternative remedy

( 4 ) "finders Keepers" an age old adage, cost the petitioner dearly.

( 5 ) THE petitioner, a constable in the Railway Protection Force was detailed alongwith another constable Sri R. K. Dubey, on 20. 4. 1990 10 escort a party of Railway officials for distribution of money to the workmen between Railway Stations Etawah and Bharthana. While going in two railways Trolleys alongwith a PW 1 and some labourers, some currency notes were found strewn between the railway tracks. On the instructions of the P. W. 1. , his staff collected the money which were in denominations of Rs. 100/- and Rs. 50/- amounting to Rs. 3,150/ -. The p. W. 1. prepared an inveptory, but it is alleged, that the petitioner and his companion constable sri Dubey forcibly took the money and the inventor from the P W. 1. on the promise that they would deposit it at the relevant place, it is alleged that the receipt for the aforesaid was not given even after demand. After his return, the petitioner did not deposit it immediately or mention it in the general diary, though it was subsequently deposited on 22. 4. 1990 with the Railway Booking office when pressure was mounted by the officials. It is further alleged that on being questioned by a Sub Inspector, they misbehaved with him. This forcible dispossession, retention of the money for about two days and the alleged misbehaviour with the Sub Inspector, prompted the railways Authorities to initiate disciplinary proceedings for major punishment and issued a charge sheet dated 1. 5. 1990 leveling the following four charges. 1. P. W. 1 I. T. W. Sey Jabarjasti Rs. 3150/- Ley Liya Va Mangney per Pawti Nahi Di. 2 Prapta Kiye Gaye Rupayon Ki report Na To Rojnamchey Mey Ki Aur Na S. I. Cash Guard c. N. B. Athwa Guard Commander Ko Rupayon Key Vishay Mey Bataya. 3. Janch Key Dauran I. P. F. /i. T. W. Key Sath Abhadrataka Voyhar Kiya Tatha Bayan Dene Sey inkar Kiya. 4. Dinak 20. 4. 1990 Ko Prapta Rupaye Dinak 22. 4. 1990 Ko lama Kiya Tatha Vrapta Rupya Do din Tak Radniyati sey Apne Avaidh Kabje Mey Rakha.

( 6 ) AFTER enquiry, the petitioner was exonerated for the most serious charge No. 3, but was found guilty on the rest of the three charges. After notice, the punishment of removal was; awarded to him on 31 8 1991 but the appear was dismissed after about a decade on 18. 4,2001.

( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has firstly urged that the first charge relating to forcibly, dispossessing the P. W. 1, of the amount and the detail sheet was not proved as there was absolutely no evidence that the petitioner at any time used any force or coercion against the p. W. 1, or any other member of his party.

( 8 ) THE department has examined several witnesses, including P. W. 1. Sh. R. G. Sharma to. prove the charges. The statements are not annexed but they have been examined and the substance has been mentioned in the enquiry report. The Trolleymen Bindeshwan and Jhabboo Lal and so also ganuman Man Singh in their deposition before the Enquiry Officer have stated that the money was handed over to the two Constables but t