IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1834 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION: July 17, 2012 Suresh Jawa …..Appellant versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present: Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the appellant HEMANT GUPTA , J. (Oral) The present appeal under Clause-X of the Letters Patent poses challenge to an order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 28.4.2011 vide which the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order passed by the revisional authority dated 23.3.2010 remained unsuccessful. The disputes between the appellant and the Mahendergarh Cooperative Marketing–cum-Processing Society Limited, Mahendergarh were referred for statutory arbitration. The Assistant Registrar vide its Award dated 24.9.2004 (Annexure P-1) found the appellant liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,24,046/- as principal with interest @ 18% per annum till the date of Award and also future interest @ 8% per annum till realisation of amount. It LPA No.1834 of 2011 - 2 - was found that the shortage of 95 quintals 37 kilograms mustard seed was on account of failure of appellant to assign duties to the other officials. The said Award was set aside in appeal by the Deputy Registrar vide order dated 29.3.2005 (Annexure P-2). But in revision against the said order, the order passed by the Assistant Registrar dated 24.9.2004 was restored vide order dated 23.3.2010 (Annexure P-3) passed by Special Secretary, Cooperation Department, Haryana. It was held that the appellant was supervising the labour of the contractor at the time of weighment and filling of bags and the shortage occurred due to his negligence in work. The challenge to the said order has remained unsuccessful. The appellant challenged the order passed by the revisional authority, inter alia, on the ground that the primary responsibility of shortage was of the subordinate staff and not that of the appellant. The said argument is not available to the appellant either in the writ petition or in the present appeal. This Court examines the decision making process and not the ultimate decisions thereof. The authority under the Act has found that the appellant has failed to carry out the work assigned to him which led to shortage. Thus, he has been rightly found responsible to make good the shortage. However, we find some substance in the argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant that the pre arbitration interest at the rate of 18% is excessive and unwarranted. LPA No.1834 of 2011 - 3 - In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we modify the pre arbitration rate of interest to that of 8% per annum but with the condition that the entire due and outstanding amount shall be deposited within one month from today. If the appellant fails to deposit the entire amount within one month, the appeal shall be deemed to be dismissed. Disposed of. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE July 17, 2012 (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) pc/vimal JUDGE