JASWANT SINGH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against an order of State Government dated 05.03.2012 whereby 25% deduction is ordered from petitioner's pension. The consequential recovery made vide separate orders is also challenged.

(2.) Petitioner retired from the post of Senior Clerk in U.P. Public Works Department, Etawah on 28.02.2009. A charge-sheet thereafter was issued to him on 20.07.2009. The charge against the petitioner was that in respect of settlement of Auction to collect toll tax on Etawah Bah Agra Road at Kachoro Ghat on river Yamuna an auction was held on 30.06.2008 and the contractor had submitted a fix deposit receipt of Rs. 42 lacs towards security. As per the charge-sheet, being the senior clerk it was the responsibility of the petitioner to have got the FDR receipt verified from the Bank but this was not done and consequently State suffered a loss amounting to Rs. 33,35,484/-. The charge levelled against the petitioner has been denied by the petitioner vide his detailed reply submitted on 27.07.2009. The petitioner has stated that for conduct of auction a Committee chaired by the Divisional Commissioner Kanpur was constituted with Chief Engineer, Kanpur Range, District Magistrate, Kanpur and the Additional Director of the concerned area being other three members of the Committee. The petitioner has further stated in his reply that after the auction was conducted on 30.06.2008 and the Divisional Commissioner approved it on 04.07.2008 and the papers were received in the Office on 07.07.2008. For the purposes of executing an agreement the allottee got the agreement typed on a stamp paper of Rs.7,42,500/- and also annexed a fix deposit receipt of Rs.42,00,000/-.

(3.) Petitioner has specifically asserted that this FDR receipt was kept in the double lock by the Executive Engineer and for the first time this fix deposit receipt has been provided to him on 24.09.2008. Petitioner's defence, accordingly, was that the FDR receipt was not handed over to him and there was no occasion for him to get the veracity of FDR verified, at any stage prior to it. It is also asserted that the petitioner got the FDR verified on the same date and after it was found that FDR was forged, he submitted a note for cancellation of contract on 24.09.2008 itself which ultimately resulted in cancellation of contract on the report submitted by the petitioner.