M. KATJU AND KAMAL KLSHORE, JJ. ( 1 ) HEARD standing counsel for the petitioner. ( 2 ) THE respondent No. 1 is a police constable who was charge-sheeted on the allegation of misconduct and dismissed after enquiry. He filed a claim petition before the U. P. Public services Tribunal. By an order dated 20. 8. 2001, the claim petition was allowed and the dismissal order and other impugned orders were quashed. ( 3 ) WE have carefully perused the impugned order of the Tribunal and find no illegality in the same. The Tribunal has held that the rules of natural justice were not complied with in the enquiry. It has been held by the Tribunal that copies of certain relevant documents were not supplied to the respondent No. 1, and hence, natural justice was denied to the respondent No. 1. ( 4 ) WE agree with this finding. However, in the ordinary course, we would have given liberty to the department to hold a fresh enquiry against the respondent No. 1 in accordance with law and natural Justice but it will delay the matter. The Incident is of the year 1991 and already 10 years have elapsed. ( 5 ) ON the special facts and circumstances of the case, we, modify the impugned judgment of the tribunal and direct that the respondent No. 1 shall be reinstated in service within a month but he will get only 25% of back wages and will be given a severe warning not to commit such misconduct in future. However, he will get continuity of service and other consequential benefits. ( 6 ) WITH the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally. .