JUDGMENT 1. - Defects have not been removed, on this count alone the special appeal is liable to be dismissed. But if taken the defect are removed, the appeal is liable to be rejected on merits also. 2. In short the facts of the case are that the respondent Narottam Lal Sharma, retired on 30.9.1993 from the post of Executive Engineer. He has been penalised vide order dated 1.3.1997 in departmental enquiry. The penalty which has been imposed upon the respondent is stoppage of 20% pension for the period of five years, and recovery of Rs. 20,000/-. The writ petition was preferred against this order. Vide order dated 8.7.2010, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2116/1997, the writ petition was partially allowed, and recovery of Rs. 20,000/- is maintained. However, penalty order of stoppage of 20% pension for the period of five years is set aside. Hence, this special appeal. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as a result of the order of learned Single Judge the Government is put to pecuniary loss. The State Government is entitled to recover the loss suffered by it. Learned Single Judge has held that loss caused to State Government, has been recovered, but the penalty order of stoppage of 20% pension for a period of five years is erroneous. Hence, the penalty order of recovery of Rs. 20,000/- was maintained, and the order of stoppage of 20% pension for a period of five years is set aside. 5. There is no much dispute about the facts of the case. The respondent in departmental enquiry has been found guilty and he was penalised. But, looking at the facts of the case that the respondent had retired after about 36 years of service, his service record was outstanding, except this enquiry. He was granted regular promotions, and just before ten days of his retirement he was served with a charge sheet. The respondent is retired from the service near about 17 years ago, and now he has completed 75 years of age. 6. The learned Single Judge has maintained the order of recovery of Rs. 20,000/-. Thus, pecuniary loss to the State Government is restored, and looking at the nature of the case stoppage of 20% pension for a period of five years is set aside. There is no infirmity in the impugned order. 7. 6. The learned Single Judge has maintained the order of recovery of Rs. 20,000/-. Thus, pecuniary loss to the State Government is restored, and looking at the nature of the case stoppage of 20% pension for a period of five years is set aside. There is no infirmity in the impugned order. 7. We are not inclined to interfere in the impugned order. The special appeal is dismissed.Special Appeal Dismissed. *******