ORDER : 1. The respondent herein who was working as Attendant in the appellant College faced departmental enquiry on certain allegations. That altogether 5 charges were framed against him out of which 3 charges were held proved. The management upon consideration of the Inquiry Report and materials available on record against the respondent passed an order dismissing him from service. The High Court vide the impugned order interfered with the order of dismissal and came to the conclusion that ends of justice would be adequately met if the management withholds 5 cumulative increments from the date of dismissal. The order of dismissal was accordingly set aside. That order is challenged in the appeal. 2. As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, the High Court committed an error in interfering with the order of dismissal passed by the appellant-management by substituting the punishment to be awarded to the respondent. The High Court at the most could have remitted the matter for fresh reconsideration by the disciplinary authority on a finding that the order of dismissal was totally disproportionate to the proven charge of misconduct but itself could not have awarded punishment stepping into the shoes of the disciplinary authority. 3. Be that as it may, it is not necessary to further dilate on various questions raised in this appeal before us. The fact remains that the respondent is not in service since 1.7.1994. Ends of justice would be met by awarding some compensation to the respondent to put an end to this controversy between the parties. Both the senior learned Counsel for the appellant as well as learned Counsel for the respondent readily agreed to the suggestion made by the Court that the matter could be closed by awarding a suitable amount of compensation to the respondent. The learned Senior Counsel submitted the calculations made by the appellant management under which at the most the respondent would be entitled to Rs. 1,75,341.17 as compensation. The learned Counsel for the respondent submitted another calculation according to which the respondent will be entitled to a sum of Rs. 4,60,647.20. Both the calculations are made on the basis of the principles decided by this Court in O.P. Bhandari vs. Indian Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. 1986 (4) SCC 337 and Workmen vs. Bharat Fritz Werner (P) Ltd. and Another, 1990 (3) SCC 565 . 4. 4,60,647.20. Both the calculations are made on the basis of the principles decided by this Court in O.P. Bhandari vs. Indian Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. 1986 (4) SCC 337 and Workmen vs. Bharat Fritz Werner (P) Ltd. and Another, 1990 (3) SCC 565 . 4. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances, we fix the total compensation of Rs. 2,50,000 payable by the appellant to the respondent within eight weeks from today. This compensation directed to be paid by the appellant is towards full and final settlement. The respondent shall not be entitled to payment of any further amounts whatsoever towards any claim. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.