Penalty discretion under section 80 limits mandatory section 76 penalty and supports a lesser sanction

Section 80 was treated as conferring discretion on the authority to impose a lesser penalty, so the penalty under section 76 was not mandatory in every case. The contention that section 76 required an invariable prescribed penalty was rejected. On that basis, no substantial question of law arose and the appeal failed, resulting in dismissal.

---

---

Issues: Whether, despite the penalty provision under section 76, the authority had discretion to impose a lesser penalty in view of section 80.

Analysis: Section 76 was relied upon to contend that the authority was bound to impose the prescribed penalty and had no discretion to reduce it. The Court held that section 80 vested discretion in the authority, and therefore the contention that penalty under section 76 was mandatory in all cases was not accepted.

Conclusion: The authority had discretion to impose a lesser penalty notwithstanding section 76, and no substantial question of law arose.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and stood dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where section 80 confers discretion, the penalty under section 76 is not inexorably mandatory and a lesser penalty may be imposed.

---