Judgment :- 1. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order, dated 15.06.2006, passed by the second respondent, in P.S.A.No.52 of 2005. 2. The second respondent had passed the impugned order, directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.78,264/- to the first respondent, based on the evidence available on record. From the letter, dated 23.12.1997, issued by the petitioner, marked as Ex.P1, it was found that the first respondent had been suspended from service. From Ex.P2, the second respondent had found that certain receipts had been issued regarding remittances made by the first respondent. The petitioner had not furnished any evidence to disprove the claims made by the first respondent. Even though, the petitioner had claimed that the first respondent had left the services, voluntarily, there is no evidence to substantiate the said claim of the petitioner. 3. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner had not shown sufficient cause or reason to interfere with the impugned order, of the second respondent, dated 15.06.2006, made in P.S.A.No.52 of 2005. Hence, this petition stands dismissed. No costs.