CWP No.177 of 1983(O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.177 of 1983(O&M) Date of Decision: 20.09.2011 Prem Chand, Ex-Secretary, Market Committee, Tarn Taran, District Amritsar ... Petitioner Versus The Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board, Chandigarh through its Secretary and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present: Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for Mr. D.S. Patiwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajdeep Singh Cheema, Advocate, for respondents No.1, 3 and 4. Ms. Kavita Arora, Addl. AG, Punjab, for respondent No.2. ***** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? NO K. KANNAN, J. (Oral) 1. The writ petition has been filed at the instance of the Secretary, Market Committee, Tarn Taran challenging the order of termination from service after a duly constituted inquiry. The charge against the petitioner was that when he was the Secretary of the Market Committee, Tarn Taran and held an additional charge of Jhabal, he had caused the purchase of metallic bins without following the due procedure by calling for quotations through competitive bids but causing the purchase from a single vendor M/s Ved Parkash Gupta & Sons. The second charge was subsidiary to the first one, viz., he showed undue haste in putting them in the resolution of the Committee CWP No.177 of 1983(O&M) [2] and issuing payments on the same day when the resolution was passed. 2. The contention of the petitioner had been that he was only holding the charge and he was directly not connected with the appraisal of the Market Committee. The decision to purchase the metallic bins from the particular vendor had been taken by the President and a concurrence was obtained in the meeting of the members of the Market Committee. He had no role to play and he had been made an scapegoat for the actions of the President and the Resident Audit Officer, who had passed the bill on approval by the Market Committee. 3. The Inquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty and he was dismissed from service. He preferred an appeal under Section 42 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961, which was also dismissed. The original orders of termination of service and the appeal are the subject of challenge before this Court. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner reiterates the contention of the petitioner that he had literally no role to play and he was being unduly victimized for the action of the President and the RAO against whom no action had been taken. The petitioner is now no more and the case is being prosecuted by the legal representatives. The legal representatives would want no more than the blot on his otherwise unsullied conduct during his tenure as a Secretary to be removed. The learned counsel would also urge that the resolution books, which are relied on by the respondents did not contain the actual participation in the meetings by the petitioner and even the list of persons, who had been shown as present at the meetings do not contain the reference to the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents supports the decision taken by the authorities by contending that the Secretary occupies a pivotal role in the scheme of things under the CWP No.177 of 1983(O&M) [3] Punjab Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961 insofar as the decisions relating to the functioning of the Marketing Committee. In terms of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (General) Rules, 1962 established under the Act, the Secretary shall advise the Committee and its Chairman in the light of the provisions of the Act, Rules and bye-laws framed under the Act. By notification issued by the Secretary to Government of Punjab on 22.03.1973, the Punjab Civil Service Rules and other Regulations are made applicable by virtue of the powers conferred under Section 43 of the Principal Act. The Punjab Financial Rules are, therefore, attracted to the modes of entering into contracts and the procedure for purchase of stores of all departments and officers of the Government in Punjab are contained in Appendix VIII of the Financial Rules. Rules 7 and 8 enjoin tenders/quotations to be invited for all contracts of whose value is `5,000/- or over, through advertisement in the Press. Admittedly the procedure for purchase of metallic bins worth more than One lac had not followed and there were surely a financial irregularity. 5. The petitioner is perhaps justified in contending that he was not himself a party to fraud and if there had been a dereliction of duty in not properly advising the Committee, the charge cannot be so serious to result in dismissal from service itself. According to him, it was no charge that the bins have not been purchased or that the price of the products have been over charged that could have resulted in either a loss to the Committee or a personal aggrandizement to the petitioner. The petitioner has only 8 years of service and during his tenure he was dismissed. The issue for consideration could only be in relation to the punishment. I will remove any stigma attached to the order, while upholding the finding that the petitioner had been guilty of dereliction CWP No.177 of 1983(O&M) [4] but I will not find him to be involved in any serious charge that could have justified a dismissal itself. By this dispensation, I cannot still restore him into service as he is not alive, not can I admit the family for financial benefits, when the employee that had only 8 years service at the time when his services were terminated. There cannot be a notional reinstatement to provide for wages during the period when he had not worked. 6. The writ petition is disposed of to the extent of removing stigma attached to the deceased by the impugned order. SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 ( K. KANNAN ) Rajan JUDGE