JUDGMENT : 1. Special leave granted. 2. Raghunath Panigrahi, respondent in the appeal herein, was working as Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Disciplinary proceedings on the following charges were initiated against him:- "i. Misappropriate of funds of the Society amounting to Rs. 571.30 and Rs. 2000/-; ii. Reckless advancing of funds to different employees and others without authority; iii. Manipulation of accounts; iv. Unauthorised expenditure from Society fund; v. Taking of T.A. on personal cases and double advance of T.A. for the same period without authority; vi. Negligence in duty; and vii. Disobedience of orders." 3. The enquiry officer proved all the charges against him. The disciplinary authority dismissed the respondent from service. He challenged the order of dismissal before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal while upholding the findings of the enquiry officer changed the nature of the penalty from dismissal to compulsory retirement on the following reasoning: "While we agree with the finding of misconduct which is serious in nature and also agree that petitioner should not be allowed to continue in service on the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that compulsory retirement from Government service would be the adequate penalty to be imposed on the petitioner by which he is not allowed to continue in service any further. A disciplinary authority is to take into consideration, while deciding to impose major penalty which would have the effect of non-continuance of the delinquent in Government service, whether it should be dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement. For this, past service career and effect of penalty on the delinquent in view of nature of misconduct are relevant factors. Considering the same in the misconduct proved when other service records are not available with us. we reduce the penalty to compulsory retirement." 4. We are of the view that the Tribunal fell into patent error. Keeping in view the serious nature of the charges, the Tribunal was not justified in imposing the lessor penalty of compulsory retirement. We allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and restore the punishment of dismissal. No costs.