CWP No. 8065 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 8065 of 2009 Date of decision : 23.08.2011 Mehar Singh Bhullar ......Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Lal Gupta, Addl.A.G. Punjab **** RITU BAHRI, J. Challenge is to the order dated 16.03.2009 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No. 1, whereby without affording any opportunity of hearing or show cause notice, the petitioner has been held guilty on account of shortage of grain in wheat stock during the year 2004-05 on basis of an alleged inquiry. Petitioner was posted as Inspector Grade-I in the office of respondent No. 3 at Ferozepur along with one Sh. Ved Prakash Gupta, Food & Supply Officer (Retd) and Sh. Swarnjit Singh, Inspector Grade-I. They were served charge sheets on 07.09.2006 (Annexure P-1) account of shortage of grain of wheat as shown in the Godown/Open Plinths under the supervision of the said employees. They also filed their reply (Annexure P-2) to the charge sheets. While petitioner has been held guilty, Sh. Sh. Ved Prakash Gupta, Food & Supply Officer (Retd) and Sh. Swarnjit Singh, Inspector Grade-I have been CWP No. 8065 of 2009 -2- acquitted of the charge against them. Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought quashing of order dated 16.03.2009 (Annexure P-6) on the short ground that the enquiry report, on which the petitioner was found guilty, was not supplied to him and, therefore, principles of natural justice have not been complied with. During the pendency of the writ petition, an affidavit has been filed by the Director-cum-Special Secretary Food Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Chandigarh on 07.01.2011. As per this affidavit, the enquiry report was sent to the District Food and Supply, which was duly received by the petitioner on 23.06.2009. The petitioner chosen not to file his reply till date. Heard. As per the Annexure P-1, the Government has suffered loss of Rs. 34,69,822-04P and therefore, the above said three employees had been charge- sheeted and petitioner had been held guilty as per the inquiry report. The stocks were stored during the tenure of the petitioner and were dispatched by him and, therefore, he was duly responsible for all the acts of commission and omission. The Supreme Court had an occasion to examine a case where without supplying the enquiry report, an employee had been dismissed from service and the High Court had set aside the dismissal order. The Supreme Court after going through the charges levelled in the charge-sheet came to the conclusion that the employee was working in a bank and was custodian of the embezzled amount and in the enquiry it was found that he was solely responsible in the alleged loss. In defence, petitioner had taken a specific stand that due to CWP No. 8065 of 2009 -3- prolonged storage of wheat there was natural shortage/less grain in the wheat stock which is supported by scientific instructions. The petitioner has further stated that the petitioner also brought to the notice of the department that out of the above period when the wheat stock was stored in the godowns/open plinths, the petitioner was sent on training course for two months. However, the respondent-department was not satisfied with the reply filed by the petitioner and ordered for a regular inquiry against the delinquent officials. Thereafter the petitioner received the impugned order dated 16.03.2009 (Annexure P-6) whereby the petitioner was held guilty of charge. The detailed enquiry report has been placed on record which has been duly received by the petitioner. However, the petitioner has chosen not to file reply to the said enquiry reprot till date. Vide order dated 16.03.2009, the petitioner was found guilty and it was ordered that further action be initiated against him. The petitioner after receiving the said enquiry report had an opportunity to file reply/objections against the said report which he has not done till date. In view of the detailed inquiry conducted, the petitioner after receiving the report did not file any reply till date. Principal of natural justice has been followed before passing of final order dated 16.03.2009(Annexure P-6). Finding no merit, the present writ petition is dismissed. 23.08.2011 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE