YASH RAJ GOYAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is to order Annexure P-10 dated January 14, 1994, removing the petitioner from service following departmental enquiry.

(2.) The brief material facts of the case are that on March 22, 1990, the petitioner was posted as Executive Officer in Municipal Committee, Jagraon. In 1991 an order for 40 MT of bitumen was placed with Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. Sudhir Kumar clerk/purchase clerk deposited bank draft of Rs. 1,42,570/- dated June 22, 1991, with the said corporation as the price of the bitumen. The mathura Refinery despatched 3 tankers containing bitumen on July 8, 1991. Two tankers reached Jagraon on July 9, 1991 and the third one on July 10, 1991. At that time Ishar Singh was Sectional Officer in the Engineering Department of the Municipal Committee. It was he who was supposed to receive the material and enter the same in the stock register. Ishar Singh was succeeded by Darshan Singh, Sectional Officer, on August 20, 1991. The fourth tanker was despatched from Mathura on August 30, 1991. On November 28, 1991, Darshan Singh, Sectional Officer, reported to the Administrator that Sudhir Kumar, purchase clerk, wanted him i.e. Darshan Singh to enter two goods receipts on account of the receipt of two tankers in the stock register. As he had no himself received the material, he had difficulty in making the entry in the stock register. On December 2, 1991 Sudhir Kumar was suspended. A preliminary enquiry into the alleged embezzlement of two tanker loads of bitumen i.e. third and fourth ones, which had not been entered in the stock register was conducted by Mr. D.S. Bedi, PCS Regional Deputy Director. Copy of the report it Annexure P-1. The conclusions reached by Mr. Bedi were (i) that the third tanker had been misappropriated by Sudhir Kumar in connivance with Ishar Singh, Sectional Officer, and (ii) that the fourth tanker had been misapprorpriated by Sudhir Kumar in connivance with Darshan Singh, Sectional Officer. With regard to Yash Raj Goyal, Executive Officer, Mr. Bedi observed as under :-

(3.) In defence, the petitioner examined Rajinder Kumar and Ashok Kumar Sharma contractors who had worked for M./C. besides giving a written statement of his defence. The petitioner was received that by order Annexure P-7 dated January 8, 1993. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report Annexure P-8 dated June 24, 1993. He held most of the charges framed against the petitioner proved. After furnishing a copy of the enqiry report and serving a show cause notice and considering the reply of the petitioner, the impugned order of removal Annexure P-10 was passed on January 14, 1994. The same has been assailed on various grounds in this petition.