Civil Writ Petition No. 1691 of 2010 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 1691 of 2010 Date of Decision : 18.5.2011 Kartar Singh .......... Petitioner Versus Punjab State Warehousing Corporation & others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present : Mr. G.P.S. Bal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.B.R. Bansal, Advocate for the respondents. **** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present writ petition is for quashing the impugned orders dated 4.8.2004 (Annexure P-10) and 8.9.2009 (Annexure P-16), passed by the Punishing Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner stood already transferred and he had relinquished the charge before the date of milling started. He contends that, in any case, arbitration proceedings qua the charges which have been levelled against the petitioner is already pending between the miller and the respondent-Corporation. Till the finalization of the arbitration proceedings no recovery could be ascertained and fixed upon the Civil Writ Petition No. 1691 of 2010 -2- petitioner, especially, when the arbitration proceedings may hold the Miller responsible for the loss, if any, to the Corporation and the amount could be recovered from the Miller. He on this basis contends that the recovery, which is being sought to be effected from the petitioner, is without any basis as of now and, therefore, the impugned orders cannot be sustained. Counsel for the respondents, although, contests the assertions of the petitioner that he would not be responsible for the loss caused to the Corporation, could not dispute the fact that the arbitration proceedings between the Miller and the Corporation are in progress for the loss which the Corporation has suffered and for which the petitioner has been held responsible and recovery ordered. In the light of the above submission, the impugned orders dated 4.8.2004 (Annexure P-10) and dated 8.9.2009 (Annexure P- 16) passed by the Punishing Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively, cannot be sustained, as the liability of the petitioner cannot be ascertained before the arbitration proceedings are finalized. That apart, the petitioner has based his claim that he was relieved prior to the milling process, on the basis of the documents this aspect has to be re-considred by the punishing authority. In case, the arbitration proceedings goes against the Corporation and it would be open to the Corporation to proceed against the petitioner and the petitioner shall also be entitled to reagitate all the grounds, which have been taken by him in the present writ petition, before the Punishing Authority as and when notice to that effect is again issued to the petitioner. Civil Writ Petition No. 1691 of 2010 -3- In view of the above, the impugned orders dated 4.8.2004 (Annexure P-10) and dated 8.9.2009 (Annexure P-16) passed by the Punishing Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively, are hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed with the above observations. 18.5.2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) 'sp' JUDGE