CHARANJIT SINGH BEDI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner had joined Punjab P.W.D. (B & R) Department as a Junior Engineer in August, 1956. On September 1, 1976, tenders were invited for constructing bridge over the peripheral road between Sectors 62-63, Mohali by the then Executive Engineer, Incharge of the Construction Division, S.A.S. Nagar, before the posting of the petitioner as Junior Engineer in that division. The tenders submitted by Shri P.L. Dua, contractor, had been accepted by the then. Executive Engineer of the Construction Division, S.A.S. Nagar. The rates etc. which were settled were also conveyed to the Chief Engineer on February 1, 1977.

(2.) The petitioner joined the said Construction Division on transfer on June 14, 1977 as Junior Engineer when the above said work on the site was already in progress. Even two running bills had already been sanctioned and paid to the contractor on the basis of the rates, which were settled by the then Executive Engineer.

(3.) It has further been averred in the writ petition that the work on the site was completed somewhere in the year 1978 and in the Audit Inspector Report of the year 1979, it had been pointed out that some irregularities had taken place while sanctioning the rates to the contractor and over payment to the tune of Rs. 1,01,959/- had been made. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated September 5, 1980 (copy at Annexure P.7) by the then Executive Engineer, S.A.S. Nagar, Construction Division, in which it had been mentioned that the petitioner had allowed the payment of special rates for well sinking to Shri P.C Dua, Contractor, in various running bills prepared by him which had resulted in excess payment to the contractor to the tune of Rs. 1,01,959/-. The petitioner was asked to explain as to under what authority the payment of special rate for well sinking was recommended by him. The petitioner gave reply on September 12, 1980 (Annexure P.8) mentioning therein that the petitioner had nothing to do with the settling of the rates and the rates had already been settled between the Executive Engineer and the contractor and the same had also been approved by the Supdtg. Engineer and sent to the Chief Engineer. Not only that, prior to the petitioner's taking over as Junior Engineer, the work was already in progress and payments of the earlier running bills had been made by the previous officers" after due sanction by the Sub-Divisional Engineer etc. in which the same rates had been sanctioned as were recommended by the petitioner as the rates already stood sanctioned and approved by the competent authority, in which the petitioner as Junior Engineer had no hand. After filing of the reply, the matter rested there. However, in February, 1990, a departmental enquiry was initiated against Shri T.C. Bali, Executive Engineer of the S.A.S. Nagar Construction Division, regarding dereliction of his duties resulting into excess payment of Rs. 1,01,959/-. It may be observed here that this enquiry was specifically against Shri T.C. Bali alone. In the report submitted by the Enquiry Officer, it was observed that since the competent authority had not approved any payment of N.S. rate at any stage, the action of Shri Bali in allowing N.S. rate is not justified. Regarding the other plea of action of the other officers/officials it was observed that was not the issue before the Enquiry Officer, but the Junior Engineer, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Divisional Accountant cannot be absolved of responsibilities and with this loss attributable to Shri Bali get reduced to 25% of the total loss. It was further reported that the charge of dereliction of duties as laid down in paragraph 5.4. of the P.W.D. Manual of Orders is proved against Shri Bali and the loss attributed to him was only 25% of the total loss.