Was this a correct police administrative decision?

A male and female officer were assigned a zone they had never worked before. they were not familiar with the businesses or the workers. in their zone, an in-progress armed robbery call is given at a convenience drive-in market. the officers arrived and covered the front door, waiting for backup to cover the back door. before backup arrives, a gunshot is heard inside the store. a male begins to slowly walk backwards toward the front door. he is ordered to stop and hit the floor, by the male and female officers. male does not stop and continues to walk backwards. now, the male suspect is observed with a shotgun in his hands. he is again ordered to drop his weapon and hit the floor. male suspect with the shotgun, slowly turns and faces the officers. lady officer opens fire and kills the suspect. male partner realizes this may be the store owner and shouts for female officer to stop firing. male officer broadcasts an officer in trouble call over the police radio. the female officer continues shooting. disciplinary board concludes that the female officer over- reacted to the situation and she was terminated. male officer was also termintated for not stopping his female partner for the actual shooting. Question: were both of these officers truly in the wrong? new zone to cover, did not know the business owners and the only way the male officer could have stopped his partner would have been to shoot her. so, was the disciplinary board correct in its decision?