As per case facts, the Petitioner, a bank employee, was removed from service for alleged fraudulent withdrawals from pension accounts by forging signatures and filling forms in his handwriting. Disciplinary ... proceedings concluded the charges were proved based on an inquiry and forensic expert report, and his appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner appealed to the High Court, arguing violations of natural justice, lack of corroborative evidence as account holders were not examined, and disproportionate penalty. The question arose whether the disciplinary findings were sufficiently supported by evidence, especially without testimony from the alleged defrauded account holders, and if the penalty was proportionate. Finally, the High Court found that essential elements for proving fraudulent withdrawal, like a complaint from account holders, were missing. Mere discrepancies in signatures or the Petitioner's handwriting on forms were insufficient without direct evidence. The court concluded the inquiry lacked proper regard for relevant evidence, and its conclusions were based on incomplete facts, making the removal disproportionate. The matter was remanded for de novo consideration after a fair hearing.