D C MEHTANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working with the second respondent as Executive Engineer till 21st of March, 1988. From 22nd March, 1988, he was on deputation with the third respondent, Indira Gandhi National Open University. At the time of taking charge on deputation with the third respondent, the petitioner had handed over the charge to his counterpart, including the Jeep No. DID 4998 under his control. The petitioner retired from service on the 31st of March, 1992.

(2.) . The retiral benefits are not given to him on the ground that a recovery is to be made from him on account of non-production of the log book of the Jeep No. DID 4998, which gave rise to the issue, whether the petitioner used the vehicle for duty purposes or he made non-duty journeys in the Jeep No. DID 4998.

(3.) . There has been series of correspondence and it is not necessary to refer to them, except to cull out what is the object of the correspondence. According to the respondents 1 & 2, the petitioner did not hand over the log book of the Jeep No. DID 4998 when he handed over the charge. According to the petitioner, he handed over the log book and he is not responsible for the loss of the log book or the production of the log book after he joined the third respondent.