Judgment :- K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Exts. P10, P11 and P14. 2. As the petitioner is now working in Thiruvananthapuram district, the challenge against Ext. P10 is no longer subsists. 3. Ext. P11 is an order passed by the disciplinary authority in the disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner. Ext. P14 is the enquiry report. Ext. P15 shows that the enquiry officer had found that the petitioner is entitled to get benefit of doubt and he found accordingly. He did not find the petitioner guilty of misconduct. On the basis of Ext. P14 enquiry report Ext. P11 order was passed. The disciplinary authority, the District Collector, after perusal of the enquiry report ordered that the preliminary enquiry also found a prima facie case and that there was case for imposing "at least a minor penalty as a deterrent against" the behaviour of the petitioner and harassment of woman officials. So, a punishment of withholding of next increment for a period of one year was awarded without cumulative effect as per Ext. P11. It is in the above circumstances the petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext. Pll. 4. The disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner was in terms of R.15 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control & appeal) Rules. An enquiry was conducted. That is revealed by Ext. P14 report of the enquiry itself. In such circumstances, the disciplinary authority shall having regard to the finding contained in the enquiry report, adopt any of the two course of action as provided for sub-r.(12) or (13) thereof. If the disciplinary authority was of the opinion that any of the penalty made mention of in terms (v) to (ix) of R.11(1), he shall furnish to the delinquent the enquiry report and give him an opportunity to show cause against the proposed penalty. In this case, that course of action was not adopted. The disciplinary authority in this case, had chosen to impose only a minor penalty as contained in R.11(1). The course of action to be adopted in such case is as provided in sub-r.(13) of R.15. The said sub-rule provides that if the Disciplinary Authority having regard to its findings is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in item (ii) to (i v) to R.11(1) should be imposed, it shall pass appropriate orders in the case. The course of action to be adopted in such case is as provided in sub-r.(13) of R.15. The said sub-rule provides that if the Disciplinary Authority having regard to its findings is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in item (ii) to (i v) to R.11(1) should be imposed, it shall pass appropriate orders in the case. In such circumstances, the Disciplinary Authority need not furnish the delinquent the enquiry report or need not issue a show cause notice. The Disciplinary Authority can directly impose any of the minor penalties if he having regard to the findings in the enquiry report is of the opinion that such a penalty shall be imposed. 5. Based on the findings in the enquiry report a Disciplinary Authority can decide to impose a minor penalty only if there if finding warranting such imposition of penalty or in other words if there is finding of guilt. In other words, if there is no finding of guilt in the enquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority cannot impose any of the minor penalties in terms of the sub-r.(13) to R.15. A Disciplinary Authority other than Government cannot disagree with the findings in the enquiry report as contained in sub-r.(11) to R.15. Even if the Disciplinary Authority disagrees with the finding, the reason for such disagreement shall be communicated to the delinquent himself. That also is not followed in this case. Therefore, imposition of penalty on the petitioner as per Ext. P11 is arbitrary and capricious exercise of power as there is no finding of guilt in the enquiry report, Ext. P14, against the petitioner. Accordingly, Ext. P11 is quashed. O.P. is allowed to the above extent. No costs.