Perverse departmental inquiry findings cannot sustain reduction in rank where charges are unproved and employee acted on appellate directions.

A departmental punishment of reduction to a lower rank was set aside because the inquiry report did not properly examine the charges and the alleged ante-dating and revenue-loss claims were not proved on the record. The court found that the employee had acted in compliance with the appellate direction and had not been informed of the pendency of revision, making the inquiry report perverse and legally unsustainable. The punishment order was quashed, and restoration to the original position with consequential service benefits was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the punishment order of reduction to a lower rank, founded on the departmental inquiry, was sustainable.

Analysis: The charges were held not to have been properly examined in the inquiry report, and the alleged ante-dating and revenue-loss allegations were not established on the record. The finding recorded that the petitioner had acted in compliance with the appellate direction and had not been informed about the pendency of revision, while the inquiry report was found to be perverse and legally unsustainable.

Conclusion: The punishment order was quashed and the petitioner was directed to be restored to the original position with consequential service benefits.

---