V K SHARMA Vs. ADMINISTRATOR UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was working as Chief Chemist with Nadehi Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd., Nadehi, Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar. During the checking and inspection of the record, 39 bags of sugar were found missing from the go-down of sugar mill. Petitioner was placed under suspension and disciplinary inquiry was held against the petitioner. Vide order dated 31.05.2013, petitioner s suspension order was revoked and petitioner was reinstated to his post, however, penalty of stoppage of one increment for three years as well as entry of censure were imposed by Mr. Surendra Singh Rawat, Administrator, Uttarakhand Cooperative Sugar Factories Federation Ltd. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner filed statutory appeal / representation and statutory appeal / representation preferred by the petitioner, was disposed of by Mr. Surendra Singh Rawat, Administrator vide order dated 07.08.2013 quashing the penalty of punishment of censure only, however, penalty of stoppage of increment of three years was maintained. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has preferred present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.A. Khan, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Aditya Kumar Arya, Advocate for the respondents.

(3.) Clause 8 of paper No. 144 of the paper book demonstrates that being Chief Chemist, petitioner was responsible for the rakh rakhaw of sugar in the store. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that rakh rakhaw as mentioned in Clause 8 of paper No. 144 denotes maintenance only. He further submits that stock register and stock always remain under the control of Store Incharge. Petitioner, as Chief Chemist, had no role to play in the movement of sugar in or out the Store managed by Store Keeper. Mr. Khoob Singh, the then Store Incharge as well as Mr. Akash Mishra who were responsible for the stock and stock register confessed their guilt, therefore, they were directed to deposit Rs. 1,26,666/- towards the cost of 39 bags of sugar and both of them deposited the amount with the Sugar factory as revealed from paper No. 149 of the paper book. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that both of them have been reinstated on deposit of the cost of 39 bags of sugar and no punishment was ever awarded against Mr. Khoob Singh and Akash Mishra, therefore, by awarding the punishment against the petitioner, petitioner has been discriminated.