ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant who was working as a Sub-Inspector of Police was found guilty in a disciplinary proceeding pursuant to which a penalty of withholding of one increment was imposed in the year 2002. The appellant did not challenge the order of punishment. 3. Arun Kumar Singh, a constable who was accused of the same allegation, challenged the order of punishment in the High Court. The High Court dismissed his writ petition. 4. While doing so, the High Court directed the State of Bihar to review the order of punishment imposed on the present appellant. The disciplinary proceeding against the appellant was re-opened and an order of dismissal was passed by the competent authority of the State of Jharkhand in the year 2009. 5. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the said order of dismissal. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition which judgment was upheld by the Division Bench. 6. When the above SLP filed by the Petitioner was listed before this Court on 24th November 2015, the learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand was directed to obtain instructions as to whether a punishment lesser than that of dismissal can be imposed on the appellant. It was further clarified in the order that the lesser punishment can be compulsorily retirement without any back wages. 7. We are informed by Dr. M.P. Raju, learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is nearing the age of superannuation and he has also become incapacitated due to paralysis. Though Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State attempted to make submissions on merits, we are of the opinion that taking into account the peculiar facts of the case, a penalty of compulsorily retirement without back wages should be imposed on the Petitioner instead of dismissal. Therefore, the Respondents are directed to alter the punishment of dismissal to compulsory retirement without back wages. 8. The Civil Appeal is disposed of.