The petitioner, a State Tax Officer, challenged his suspension order issued on the allegation that refund of IGST was granted without proper verification. The factual background showed that refunds were sanctioned within statutory timelines and in accordance with prescribed circulars.

The Court held that grant of refund is a quasi-judicial function and disciplinary action cannot be initiated merely on account of a different opinion or subsequent detection of fraud by the exporter. The suspension order was quashed.