CWP No.17771 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.17771 of 2009 Date of Decision: 11.10.2010 **** Balbir Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Food Corporation of India & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. VK Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. HP Verma, Advocate for the respondents ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner joined the respondent-Corporation as an Assistant Grade-III on 8th December, 1969. He was promoted as Assistant Grade-II in the year 1971 followed by further promotion as Assistant Grade-I in the year 1976. He was then promoted as an Assistant Manager (D) in August 2000 and he retired from service w.e.f. 31.12.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation from the said post. CWP No.17771 of 2009.doc - 2 – (2). The petitioner has got an unusual ‘farewell’ at the hands of the respondent-authorities immediate before his retirement, as a charge-sheet is purported to have been issued on 19.09.2009 vide memo dated 21.10.2009 (Annexure P1 & P2, respectively) alleging as follows (relevant extracts only) :- “That the above mentioned official while working as such along with other officials at H.G. Moga District Faridkot during the year 1978-1981 did not discharge his duties with absolute integrity and due devotion to duty in as much as during his incumbency he was responsible for receipt, storage and issue of rice stocks. The stocks so accepted at the aforesaid centre were finally liquidated/issued out during 1980-81. Upon liquidation of stocks, the following quantum of storage loss has been observed from the storage loss statements submitted for write off sanction:- (3). Aggrieved by the belated charge-sheet at the fag end of his career that the petitioner has approached this Court. (4). The respondents have filed their reply/affidavit in which the facts noticed above are broadly admitted. It is, however, claimed that the petitioner did not discharge his duties as Assistant Gr-I with absolute integrity when he was posted at Moga in the year 1980-81 and is CWP No.17771 of 2009.doc - 3 – responsible for causing the alleged loss mentioned in the charge-sheet dated 19.09.2009. (5). Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and on perusal of the records, it appears that the issuance of the impugned charge-sheet at this juncture lacks bona fide and is an outcome of colorable exercise of powers. There is not even a whisper in the written statement as to when the alleged irregularities committed by the petitioner were detected or why the same have surfaced a few days/month before his retirement? The reply does not even suggest that the petitioner concealed any information; destroyed or fuzzed the records for years. Even if there were to be a grain of truth in the allegations, it simply exhibits complete mal- administration, mis-management and grossest negligence in the performance of duties from the higher echelons of the respondent-Corporation including the Officers who have been heading the Regional Office. How have they gone scot-free despite an equally serious mis-conduct, has also gone unexplained. CWP No.17771 of 2009.doc - 4 – (6). The petitioner is right in contending that a serious prejudice shall be caused to him as the original records have traveled through several hands in two decades and many officers/officials whose deposition can throw light, have retired or died. The fact that he was retained as Assistant Grade-I for 20 years before his further promotion as Assistant Manager despite the so-called serious misconduct strengthens his allegation that the charges are motivated to withhold his retiral dues. (7). For the reasons afore-stated, the impugned charge-sheet dated 19.09.2009 (Annexure P1) is hereby quashed; the writ petition is allowed with costs of Rs.25,000/- which shall be recovered from the officials/officers who are responsible for issuing the charge-sheet at this belated stage. (8). A compliance affidavit to this effect shall also be place on record. (9). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 11.10.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE