IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 2629 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : 16.04.2009 Ranbir Singh .... PETITIONER Versus Punjab State Ware Housing Corporation, Chandigarh and another ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner, who served the respondent Corporation as District Manager and retired from service on 31.7.2007 after attaining the age of superannuation, has filed the instant petition for quashing the order dated 22.8.2006 (Annexure P-4), passed by respondent No.1, ordering the recovery of an amount of Rs. 56,259/- from the petitioner as well as the order dated 8.5.2008, passed by respondent No.1, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order has been dismissed. In this case, the petitioner was charge sheeted for not maintaining the health of wheat stock in his custody resulting in deteriorating the health of the stocks adversely verging financial losses at Samana where he remained posted as Warehousing Manager for the period CWP No. 2629 of 2009 -2- from 5.4.2000 to 16.7.2001. In the enquiry report, it was found that a total loss of Rs. 2,81,295/- was caused by the petitioner and four other guilty officials (S/Shri J.P. Kakria, Avtar Singh, Harish Chander and Harminder Singh) on account of damage of wheat stocks crop during the year 1998-99 and 2000-01 at State Warehouse, Samana. Accordingly, vide order dated 22.8.2006 (Annexure P-4), an amount of Rs. 56,259/- each was ordered to be recovered from all the five delinquents. The petitioner filed appeal against the said order, which has been dismissed. It has been found that the petitioner was afforded full opportunity to defend himself. Before passing the impugned order, he was provided personal hearing. Each and every aspect of the reply to show cause notice was considered by the Managing Director and thereafter, recovery of the aforesaid amount was ordered. The Appellate Authority did not find any illegality or irregularity in the conduct of the enquiry or assessment of the aforesaid amount. After hearing counsel for the petitioner and going through the aforesaid impugned orders, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned orders, as in my opinion, before passing the impugned order, the petitioner was fully provided opportunity to defend himself and the principle of natural justice was duly followed. Counsel for the petitioner only argued that the calculation of amount was made by the Managing Director in an arbitrary manner. I do not find any force in this argument. The competent authority has assessed the loss on the basis of the material available on record. No illegality or perversity has been pointed out. Thus, I CWP No. 2629 of 2009 -3- do not find any ground to review the impugned orders. No merit. Dismissed. April 16, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE