Antony Dominic, J. The respondents in W.P.(C) No. 1308 of 2012 are the appellants. The writ petition filed by the respondent herein was disposed of by the learned Single Judge upholding the penalty levied by the appellants, but reducing the quantum from twice the amount to 1.5 times. It is this judgment which is under challenge.
2. We heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellants and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Although the learned Senior counsel argued that the learned Single Judge has not interfered with the penalty imposed, a reading of the judgment shows that while the learned single Judge upheld the penalty, has only interfered with the quantum thereof exercising the discretionary power available. Thus, such an exercise of discretionary power by the learned Single Judge does not find out any illegality justifying interference. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the appeal. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.
sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.
rv