OM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was Sub Divisional Officer, Mechanical in the Department of Irrigation and Power of the State of Punjab. He retired with effect from March 31, 1986 on attaining the age of superannuation. In the year 1987 he was charge sheeted as follows : During his tenure as Sub Divisional Officer, Mechanical Drainage Construction, Sub Division No. 2, Ferozepur during 1984-85, 1985-86, machines which were working under his charge "on no profit - no loss basis" were alleged to have earned loss as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_179_LAWS(P&H)11_2002(1).html</FRM>

(2.) He gave reply but the competent authority did not feel satisfied with his reply and he was tried on that charge sheet and was held responsible for causing loss to the Government to the tune of Rs. 1,66,696.59. This was 1/3rd share of the total loss, caused to the Government. 2/3rd share of the total loss was to be borne by the other two junior engineers. As a result of departmental enquiry into that charge sheet held by the Director Hydel Design Organisation, Chandigarh, the following conclusion was arrived at :

(3.) Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab Irrigation and Power Department found the petitioner responsible for the loss and ordered to effect the recovery of the amount of loss of forfeiture of gratuity amount of Rs. 66,000/- and the shortfall, if any, of the loss was ordered to be recovered by imposition of 10% cut on his pension vide order dated July 13, 1999. The grievance of the petitioner expressed through this writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is that he has unjustly been penalised by the Government. He retired in 1986. Charge sheet against him was drawn up on 23.5.1987. He gave reply on 4.9.1987. Enquiry Officer was appointed in 1995 and he completed the enquiry on 11.8.1997. His grievance is that there was prejudice to him in the conduct of enquiry as the material witness Sh. J.S. Joshi, who was Executive Engineer had expired. Material record was destroyed in floods. His further grievance is that these were old machines. These had outlived their life and, therefore, operation cost was more than that of the output. Keeping in view that the draglines and other machinery had outlived their life in the Mechanical Drainage Divisions of Drainage Organisation, Chief Engineer Drainage, Irrigation Works, Punjab, Chandigarh, revised the norms and other co-related issues for the working of draglines and other machinery which had out-lived their life vide Annexure P- 17 dated 12.7.1995. His case is that if the norms as laid down in Annexure P-17 by the Chief Engineer/Drainage, Irrigation Works, Punjab, Chandigarh were taken into account, there would have been no finding by the enquiry officer that he was responsible for the loss caused to the Government. His grievance is that two other officials namely Khush Raj Gupta and Raunak Singh, who were junior engineers who were similarly charge-sheeted have been exonerated by the Chief Engineer. In a similar case, Principal Secretary, Irrigation and Power has exonerated one Sat Pal Virdi, Sub Divisional Officer. It was also submitted that the machines were quite old and their out-turn was less and in case norms of old machines are revised, there will be no loss. In the event Dragline is deployed for removal of slush from very hard soil or if it works on salbeams, rates go up due to very poor out turn in such conditions, whereas the rates are accepted by the civil divisions on the normal rates provided in the projects sanctioned. In the event of increase in salary of operational and supervisory staff on account of additional relief sanctioned by the Govt. from time to time or additional amenities provided to the staff in the shape of uniform allowances or other facilities allowed to the staff also results into the increase of the rates. The upward trend in the price of petrol, oil and lubricants also results in the increase of rates. Sometimes, Draglines remain idle for considerable period when it is struck in mud or slush, thereby resulting in the increase of operational rates. The machinery was at the last phase of life during the relevant years. When the machinery practically outlives its life, it requires frequent repairs while the provisions for running repairs at last stage as in the sanctioned estimate is reduced from 30% to 20%, instead of increasing to the higher side, thus the extra cost involved reflects heavily on the rates as compared to the actual rates of out-turn. On these grounds, the petitioner has prayed for the quashing of the impugned order Annexure P-21 passed by the Principal Secretary, Government of Punjab, Irrigation and Power Department.