https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183540 Under Article 226, the High Court cannot reappreciate evidence or sit in appeal over findings in a departmental enquiry; interference is limited to cases of want of jurisdiction, procedural illegality, breach of natural justice, or findings that are perverse or unsupported by any evidence. On the facts, the Tribunal's finding of misconduct was upheld because it rested on available material, including the respondent's own statement and other evidence, and the absence of conductor charts did not make the enquiry unsustainable. The Supreme Court restored the dismissal order and held the High Court's interference with the departmental finding unsustainable. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2016 17:59:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183540 Under Article 226, the High Court cannot reappreciate evidence or sit in appeal over findings in a departmental enquiry; interference is limited to cases of want of jurisdiction, procedural illegality, breach of natural justice, or findings that are perverse or unsupported by any evidence. On the facts, the Tribunal's finding of misconduct was upheld because it rested on available material, including the respondent's own statement and other evidence, and the absence of conductor charts did not make the enquiry unsustainable. The Supreme Court restored the dismissal order and held the High Court's interference with the departmental finding unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183540