SARAYYA Vs. NIZAM SUGAR FACTORY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed the order of the 1st respondent dated 30-12-1993 which is hereinafter referred to as 'the impugned order' and has prayed for quashing the same as illegal and void and for a consequential direction to declare that the petitioner is entitled to be continued in service with effect from the date of suspension with all consequential benefits.

(2.) A perusal of the impugned order shows that seven charges were levelled against the petitioner and an Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct enquiry into the said charges. The impugned order further states that as petitioner (charge-sheeted officer) was in the scale of pay above Rs.2000-2500/-, the Committee of Directors are the Competent authority to impose punishment. The matter was placed before the Committee of Directors for taking a decision on imposing appropriate punishment and that the said Committee of Directors met on 1st December, 1993 and after taking into consideration the gravity of misconduct proved has decided to impose punishment of removal from service under Clause 4.7 of the Discipline and Appeal Rules of the Company (for short "the Rules") with effect from the date of suspension i.e., 22-3-1993 (A.N), a copy of the notice and Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee of Directors was enclosed with the impugned orders.

(3.) Five out of the seven charges relate to the sale of 12,000 bulk 1ts. of DS to one M/s. Sridhar Chemicals (P) Limited on 19-12-1992. There was no firm by the said name and the said quantity of 12,000 bulk liters of DS were delivered to this firm under forged documents which the petitioner failed to verify and as a responsible unit head also failed to verify the authenticity of the Tanker. The petitioner is purported to have recommended a refund of Rs.415/- to the said party mentioning a different cash receipt number and even after the discrepancy was noted clarified by the Head of his Accounts Department, the petitioner failed to lodge police complaint and neither alerted the Head Office nor intimated the Commissioner of Excise nor lodged a complaint with Police. The incriminating documents relating tp the fraudulent delivery were allowed to be collected by the Distillery Officer),and subsequently reported to have destroyed, to wipe out evidence. The next charge relates to oral instructions of the petitioner to deliver material to M/s. Akshit Organics on 8-3-1993. The last charge relates to certain procedural and financial irregularities in respect of repairs and maintenance works carried out without obtaining administrative approval from Head Office and allotting works to outside Contractors without following prescribed procedure. The Enquiry Officer appointed for the said purpose submitted his report holding the petitioner guilty of all the charges. The Disciplinary Authority which is the Sub-Committee of Directors of the Company in the instant case imposed the punishment of removal and thereafter the Appellate Authority which is the Board of Directors, in the instant case, dismissed the Appeal filed by the petitioner, consequential orders dated 23-12-1993 directing the removal of the petitioner are assailed in the above writ petition.