CWP No. 7153 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 7153 of 2010 Date of Decision: 22.4.2010 K.L. Rishi ....Petitioner. Versus Food Corporation of India and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. K.S. Rekhi, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 22/24.7.2008 (Annexure P-11) passed by respondent No.2 whereby the appeal filed by him against the order dated 13.12.2007 (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent No.3 imposing penalty of compulsory retirement and forfeiture of gratuity was upheld. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the respondent-Corporation as Technical Assistant-III on 28.3.1972 and was promoted as Technical Assistant-II in the year 1976. In the year 2007, he was issued a charge-sheet (Annexure P-1) to the effect that he failed to maintain absolute integrity and due devotion towards his duties. The respondent-Corporation appointed Shri T.P. Singh as Inquiry Officer and in the enquiry proceedings, vide inquiry CWP No. 7153 of 2010 -2- report dated 13.9.2007 (Annexure P-8), the Inquiry Officer held the charges levelled against the petitioner to be proved. Respondent No.3 vide impugned order dated 13.12.2007 (Annexure P-9) imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement upon the petitioner from the service of the respondent-Corporation besides forfeiture of the gratuity. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal dated 31.1.2008 (Annexure P-10) before respondent No.2 who vide order dated 22/24.7.2008 (Annexure P-11) dismissed the same. Hence, the present writ petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record with his assistance. The appellate authority on the basis of the material available on record has concurrently come to the conclusion that the charges framed against the petitioner were duly proved and the Inquiry Officer rightly held that the petitioner had not maintained absolute integrity, due devotion to duty, and found instrumental in deliberate acceptance of BRL rice stocks. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the aforesaid findings recorded against the petitioner which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed in limine. April 22, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE