Civil Writ Petition No.297 of 1987 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.297 of 1987 Date of decision: November 22, 2010. The Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. (MARKFED), Chandigarh ...Petitioner(s) v. The Deputy Secretary to Government Punjab (Appeals) & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Shri Karminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Shri Palvinder Singh, Sr. Dy. Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri M.S. Dhillon, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Shri HPS Aulakh, Advocate, for respondent No.5. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia , J. (Oral): The Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. (MARKFED), Chandigarh, through its Additional Managing Director, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued and the order dated 18.2.1986 (Annexure P-2) passed by the revisional authority be quashed. The grievance of the petitioner is that the revisional authority has wrongly fastened the Markfed with the liability of Rs.12,248.30 as Civil Writ Petition No.297 of 1987 -: 2 :- principal, Rs.3,445/- as interest and Rs.2,340/- as cost, totalling Rs.18,034.30. It is stated that the revisional authority has wrongly appreciated the facts and the if facts and circumstances are re-appreciated in the right perspective, then the order of the revisional authority is liable to be set aside. Briefly stated, Morinda Cooperative Marketing-cum-Processing Society Limited, Morinda, District Ropar (in short the Society) used to sell fertilizer belonging to the petitioner on the basis of commission. The Society is managed by an elected Managing Committee. Sher Singh s/o Arjun Singh was ex-salesman of the society. In the year 1977-78, an audit was conducted and shortage of 129 bags of fertilizers was discovered in the stores of the Society. The Society was held responsible for a shortage amounting to Rs.12,248.30. On 10.8.1979, the Managing Committee passed a resolution that dispute be raised against respondent No.3 – Markfed and Sher Singh, ex-salesman of the Society. The dispute was referred to the arbitrator who gave his award on 27.3.1981 and absolved Sher Singh of the liability and directed the Managing Committee to recover the amount from the petitioner. In the alternative, it was held that in case the Society fails to recover the amount from the petitioner, members of the Managing Committee of the Society will be personally responsible. Two members of the Managing Committee filed an appeal against the award. The Appellate Authority remanded the dispute to the arbitrator for fresh decision. The arbitrator gave his award on 15.4.1982 and fixed the liability of Sher Singh, ex-salesman and three members of the Managing Committee. The award dated 15.4.1982 was made subject matter of an appeal. The Appellate Authority absolved the members of the Managing Committee but Civil Writ Petition No.297 of 1987 -: 3 :- fastened Sher Singh ex-salesman with the entire liability. Aggrieved against the same, Sher Singh filed a revision petition. Sher Singh demonstrated before the revisional authority that 4525 bags of fertilizers were lifted from the Kurali Warehouse of the petitioner and the bags were not in good condition and were torn, therefore, the farmers refused to lift the fertilizer from the godown of the Society. This fact was brought to the notice of the Managing Committee of the Society. The petitioner and the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies verbally ordered that the sale of fertilizer be effected after re-bagging of the urea by the Society. To comply with the verbal directions, the Society passed a resolution on 30.7.1977 and in compliance with the resolution, re-bagging was done from 1.8.1977 to 8.9.1977. Since bags were in torn condition, this caused damage to the fertilizer and fertilizer was lost in transit, thus, when 4525 bags were re- bagged, shortage occurred. This shortage was entered in the record of the Society at page No.124 and society passed a resolution for claiming the shortage from the petitioner. Resolution to this effect was passed and sent to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. Counsel for the petitioner has failed to dislodge the findings returned by the revisional authority, that the urea was filled in new bags and re-bagging had taken place. Counsel has also failed to explain the resolutions passed by the Society. The revisional authority has returned following finding of fact:- “... The record further shows that the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies sent his recommendations to D.M. Markfed vide his letter dated 20.1.1979 which was entered in the receipt register of D.M. Markfed at Diary No.222 dated Civil Writ Petition No.297 of 1987 -: 4 :- 20.1.1979. The record further shows that on 29.11.1975 the petitioner informed the Manager of respondent No.2 Society that the fertilizer which had been received from State Housing Corporation, Kurali at Morinda Railway Station was lying in deteriorated form in torn bags before the stock is taken into godown of respondent society it should be filled in new bags after standardization and in case the same is not done at the Railway Station then the stocks should be moved to the godown of the respondent society and it should be kept in double lock of the respondent society and that of Markfed. It should be standardized and rebagged so that no loss is caused to the respondent society. It is further on record that the President and Committee members in this communication dated 6.12.1976 to the address of Managing Director, Markfed respondent No.3 informed inter alia that the fertilizer had been received from Warehousing Kurali from 23.11.75 to 30.11.75 in torn bags. Respondent society stated that the society would accept the stock after 100% weighment and rebagging of fertilizer in new bags because the farmers are not ready to purchase the fertilizer in the present position. It is clear from the record that instead of 100% weighment only test weighment was undertaken at the Railway Station and the fertilizer was not filled in new bags as had been pressed earlier by the management of the society. There is a test weighment receipt on record which shows that the test weighment was done in the presence of Manager of respondent No.2 Society and Shri Civil Writ Petition No.297 of 1987 -: 5 :- Harbhajan Singh Pakneja, Sr. Assistant Manager Markfed, Punjab at Chandigarh and Shri Harbhajan Singh Fertilizer Sub Inspector, Morinda. ...” Furthermore, the instructions issued by the General Manager of the petitioner's plant, to the following effect, were also noticed:- “You are requested to please supply 1000 new empty bags of 50 kg. to Morinda Cooperative Marketing Society for rebagging purpose.” Facts heavily weigh against the petitioner. This Court has always held that a writ Court cannot act as an appellate court. It is the patent irregularity or illegality only which calls for interference by the Writ Court. This Court cannot tread the path of re-appreciation and re-appraisal of the evidence. Thus, I find no infirmity in the finding returned by the revisional authority, which are to the following effect:- “... that the responsibility for the shortage of fertilizer which occurred due to standardization and rebagging, lies with Markfed and none else. In the circumstances, I absolve the petitioner and foist the entire liability on respondent No.3 – Markfed.” Thus, there is no merit in the present writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs. [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] November 22, 2010. Judge kadyan