NARANG SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TAKING support of highly technical miss, the appellant has raised his challenge against the findings given by the Trial Court as well as by the First Appellate Court. Respondent-Board will plead that the appellant does not deserve to be heard as he is accused of fraud, which would defeat all his legal pleas or equities, if any.

(2.) THE allegations against the appellant are that he had obtained his entry into the service of the Board in a fraudulent manner and has enjoyed the fruit of service for nearly 10 years, when this fact was detected. As per the appellant, he was appointed on 25.8.1991 as Labourer and was made to join at Mandi Gobindgarh on 23.12.1991. To show his appointment, the appellant refers to daily attendance register maintained by Assistant Engineer, Mandi Gobindgarh, where his presence has been marked from 23.12.1991 onwards. THE appellant, therefore, pleads that he was taken aback when he was charge sheeted on 8.1.1999. THE allegation made in the charge sheet was that the appellant had in a fraudulent manner misrepresented himself to be already in the job and on that basis joined the post of Mandi Gobindgarh.

(3.) THE Board appeared and filed a written statement, pointing out that the appellant had suppressed the true facts. It was pointed out that appellant was never appointed in July-August 1991 and rather had managed to enter into the service by back door by misrepresenting the employees of the Board and by playing fraud on them. Though he was never in the employment of the Board, but he had filed an application for his transfer by misrepresenting that he was a work charge employee of the Board. On this application, he was able to arrange an order by Superintending Engineer recommending to adjust him at M.E., Sub Station Khanna. On a complaint being made to P.S.E.B., an enquiry was made and it was found that the plaintiff had managed his entry into the service by illegal means and by misrepresenting the facts and, thus, played fraud on the Board. A charge sheet was accordingly served to the appellant. He was afforded full opportunity to explain his position and produce evidence but he did not cooperate. Having been found guilty by the Enquiry Officer, the order of termination of the appellant was passed by the Board. Plea thus is that the appellant was never an employee of the Board and had entered the service by playing fraud and, thus, has caused a loss to the Board in this manner. THE suit filed by the appellant was dismissed. THE appeal has also been dismissed.