Limited judicial review in disciplinary proceedings bars reappreciation of evidence and substitution of tribunal findings.

In disciplinary proceedings, the disciplinary authority is the proper fact-finder, and judicial review is limited to whether the process was fair and whether the finding is supported by evidence. A tribunal cannot sit in appeal over that finding, reweigh evidence, or substitute its own view on proof of a charge of illegal gratification, especially where strict rules of evidence do not apply. Interference is justified only where there is no evidence or a legal infirmity. Applying that standard, the tribunal acted unlawfully in reappreciating the evidence and overturning the disciplinary finding, so the disciplinary action was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could reappreciate the evidence in a disciplinary proceeding and substitute its own finding on the charge of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.

Analysis: The disciplinary authority is the proper authority to assess the material on record and record findings in departmental proceedings. Judicial review is confined to examining whether the decision-making process is fair and whether the finding is supported by evidence on record. The Tribunal does not sit in appeal over the disciplinary authority and cannot reweigh evidence or arrive at its own conclusion on the proof of charges, particularly where technical rules of evidence do not govern such proceedings. Interference is warranted only if the finding is based on no evidence or suffers from legal infirmity.

Conclusion: The Tribunal acted illegally in reappreciating the evidence and overturning the disciplinary finding. Its order was set aside and the disciplinary action was restored.

---