GUNI RAM WANGE Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For proper appreciation of the controversy raised by the present writ petition and the real issues involved therein, it is apposite to bear in mind some of the material facts and crucial stages, which have led to the passing of this order, whereby I intend to dispose of not only WP (C) No. 107 (AP) of 2004, but also Misc Case No.39 (AP) of 2004 and Contempt Case (C) No. 11 (AP) of 2004. I have accordingly heard Mr. K. Ete, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, and Mr. PK Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2. I have also heard Mr. BL Singh, learned Senior Govt Advocate, appearing on behalf of the remaining respondents.

(2.) The writ petitioner, while serving at Naharlagun as the General Manager, Arunachal Pradesh Co-operative Marketing and Supply Federation Ltd (herein after referred to as the APCMSFL) was, vide order, dated 28.11.2002, passed by the respondent No. 2, namely, Managing Director (APCMSFL), given the additional charge of the FPS wholesale godown, Naharlagun, including procurement and distribution of PDS commodities and while the petitioner was so functioning with the additional charge vested in him, the respondent No.2 passed an order dated 7.2.2004, directing a team of two of the officers of the APCMSFL, namely, the Chief Accountant and a Deputy General Manager to check the accounts, that is, the cash memos/challans, daily stock books, etc of the FPS main godown of the APCMSFL with effect from April, 2003, till date along with timely deposit of sale-proceeds to the cashier and to submit a report in this regard, at the earliest, to the respondent No.2. Acting upon the directions so issued, the team of officers submitted on 5.3.2004, a report to the respondent No.2 indicating therein, inter alia, that the cash memoranda bearing numbers 2416 to 2425, dated 25.2.2004, to 5th March, 2004, which covered an amount of Rs. 1,67,869.93 had not been entered into the Daily Sales Abstract (DSA) and that the said amount had not yet been deposited with the cash branch. The details of the relevant cash memos were also submitted by the said team of officers to the respondent No.2. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 directed the petitioner, vide the impugned order dated 13.3.2004, to hand over, immediately, his complete charge of FPS wholesale godown, Naharlagun, to the respondent No. 3, namely, Sri RB Paul, Junior Sales Assistant. The reason assigned for giving this direction, as reflected from the impugned order, was the mishandling of cash and stock of the FPS wholesale godown, Naharlagun.

(3.) Challenging the impugned order dated 13.3.2004, as illegal, arbitrary, stigmatic and malafide in nature, the petitioner approached this Court with a writ application with the grievances that the impugned order ought not to have been passed without giving any opportunity of showing cause or hearing to the petitioner and that if there was any allegation, the authorities concerned could have resorted to departmental proceedings or inquiry, but could not have transferred the petitioner by way of punishment nor could have the petitioner been directed to hand over the charge to a person, who is not competent. This writ application gave rise to WP (C) No. 107 (AP) of 2004.