Proportionate disciplinary penalty may be substituted by the court where remand is unnecessary and delay favours finality.

In disciplinary matters involving misconduct and a procedural defect in the enquiry, the proportionality of the proposed punishment must be assessed against the proved charge and the need for finality. Where the Court considers remittal for fresh punishment unnecessary because of delay and the case should be brought to a quietus, it may itself substitute an appropriate penalty instead of sending the matter back. The stated final consequence was reinstatement without back wages and a recorded censure.

---

---

Issues: Whether the punishment proposed for the employee's misconduct was proportionate and what relief should follow from the irregularity found in the disciplinary process.

Analysis: The allegation related to breach of conduct rules in inspecting premises without proper authorisation. The disciplinary action was examined in the light of the procedural defect found in the enquiry and the nature of the proved charge. The Court declined to remit the matter for reconsideration of punishment after noting the long passage of time and instead determined an appropriate final penalty.

Conclusion: The punishment was modified to reinstatement without back wages and with a recorded censure.

Ratio Decidendi: In disciplinary matters, where the Court finds the matter should be brought to a quietus and the existing punishment is not appropriate, it may itself substitute a proportionate penalty instead of remanding the issue.

---