held that 11 KV feeder might have been charged by the staff of the South Mobile Unit Sub-Station ('M.U.S.S'), resulting in the accident. The Disciplinary Authority considered the report of the Enquiry Officer and issued a second show cause notice to the petitioner disagreeing with the report of the Enquiry Officer on the ground that the petitioner was responsible to ensure that the linemen were provided with sufficient safety equipment and to ensure that 11 KV feeders were earthed. The Disciplinary Authority was therefore of the opinion that the petitioner was responsible for the accident in some measure and therefore, called upon the petitioner to submit his reply. The petitioner submitted his reply again contending that he had obtained a line clearance before undertaking the maintenance on 11 KV feeder but it was accidentally charged by the South M.U.S.S. The Disciplinary Authority not satisfied by the explanation offered by the petitioner and being convinced that the petitioner failed to ensure that the linemen wore sufficient safety gear, passed the order dated 27.03.2008 imposing a minor penalty to recover Rs.50,000/- from the salary of the petitioner apart from withholding his one increment with cumulative effect. Being aggrieved by the said order, the
