SHIV DUTT BISSA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who is Superintending Engineer since 1983 -84 is governed by the Rajasthan Service of Engineers (Public Health and Engineering Department) Service Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1968'). The petitioner states that without there being any reasons, he has been charge -sheeted vide Annex. 1 under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1958') for imposing minor punishment. The charge -sheet is dated 23.11.1992 and concerns to the event which had taken place in the year 1988 -89. It is submitted that from the bare reading of charge -sheet Annex. 1, he has been charged for placing orders for purchase of C.I. Detachable Joints beyond the prescribed limits of amount at his level. There are no allegations of any misfeasant, misappropriation or any loss caused to the Government or any other misconduct except that he had exceeded of his limits to place the orders which orders according to respondents, can be placed or procured with the prior permission of Chief Engineer. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, charge -sheet has been issued to the petitioner with ulterior motive for obstructing his promotion to the post of Addl. Chief Engineer when he had reached in the zone of such consideration, and after such consideration, and even his name is said to have kept in sealed cover. It is stated that there is no allegations that the petitioner had misused any of his powers. Rather the submission of the petitioner is that he had duly informed the Chief Engineer at the time of placing of orders and sought his approval at the time of placing the orders for urgent requirement of raw material and the Chief Engineer did accord his approval much before] receipt of material which material were sent direct to the concerned X.Ens. and the payment was also made direct to the Divisions after the requirement had been approved. It is submitted that there was no misconduct involved nor it could amount to any misconduct and it is further submitted that whole of the charge -sheet needs to be quashed for the reason that approval or permission which was sought, at the time of placing the orders, did come from the Chief Engineer before receipt of the purchased material. It is stated that, had there been any misuse or misconduct on the part of the petitioner, the Chief Engineer who was informed about 6 months prior to receipt of the material, instead of approving, he could have and should have stopped the approval of the orders initiated by the petitioner.

(2.) IT is alleged that as per Govt. Instruction dated 28.10.1988 (Annex.3), it had been provided that 'as far as possible' order shall be issued to all the firms in accordance with the rate contract as per demand, but the order shall be issued to one firm for three lacs only and in a circle, no order more than Rs. 5 lacs can be placed without obtaining the prior permission of the office of Chief Engineer. The allegations state that the petitioner was competent to place the orders upto Rs. 5 lacks and if any order above Rs. 5 lacs for purchase of material was to be placed, in that situation, prior permission of Chief Engineer was required. Admittedly in the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner had placed orders of more than Rs. 10 lacks to the firm with simultaneous intimation to the Chief Engineer for approving the action, in view of the urgent need required for obtaining the joints for laying down the water pipes which water pipes were lying at the spot but could not be utilised without the joints. Admittedly the payment was to be made by the concerned Officer i.e. Chief Engineer after receipt of the material. The petitioner had submitted the reply to the charge -sheet vide Annex.2 dated 7.12.1992. It was stated by the petitioner that many water schemes were in progress at as many as 11 places involving huge expenses including the emergency schemes at Jalore and Pali where people were suffering from acute shortage of water due to draught conditions and, therefore, the requirement of the joints to be procured for maintaining the proper regular water supply was necessary. The Government had decided to complete the water supply schemes as non availability of drinking water was causing accurate problems. The pipes for supplying the water were made available, but the joints were not made available for completing the work of connecting the pipes and, therefore, It was felt necessary to place orders for procurment of joints and thus four orders of total amount of more than Rs. 10 lacks were placed, copy of orders was also sent to the Chief Engineer for according approval and, therefore, this letter for approval sent by the petitioner was as good as request for seeking a prior permission. It was further submitted by the petitioner in the reply to the chargesheet that incase the order was placed beyond the prescribed limit and if the Chief Engineer did not want to approve, then immediately Chief Engineer ought to have cancelled the orders before the receipt of the material. After placing of the orders. Chief Engineer was having full knowledge of requirement as per the orders and rather correspondence had also been exchanged between the petitioner and Chief Engineer in this regard. The fact that Chief Engineer did not cancel the orders and rather approved it and issued the letter of credit for payment to the concerned authorities, goes to show that Chief Engineer had not only approved it, but had confirmed the orders which amounts to granting of permission. Vide another Jetter dated 13.12.1989, Chief Engineer had directed the petitioner not to place any further orders and, therefore, except the order placed in Jan. 1989, no orders were placed lateron. It was further submitted in' reply Annex. 2 that the orders for the material to be supplied was on the approved rate contract. It was further submitted that orders for joints were placed as per direction of the Chief Minister when he had visited Jalore accompanied by the Home Minister and Chief Engineer, Jodhpur. It was further submitted that no loss had been caused to the State Government in any manner rather the State Government was put to a direct and indirect gain because of the reason that lateron, for the year 1989 -90, the rates had increased and thus the Government had saved lot of money. The petitioner had also mentioned the reasons in the reply that public was being put into great incovenience because of non -supply of the joints within time and, therefore, the laying down of the pipes could not be carried out because of shortage of joints and as soon as the joints had reached, the work was completed and the villagers at large were benefited.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY no inquiry was held because of the reason that petitioner was charged under Rule 17 of the Rules of 1958. The petitioner was punished vide Annex. 16 dated 30.6.95 alongwith other officers who were also similarly charge sheeted. The relevant part of punishment in case of petitioner Sh. S.D. Bissa reads as under: Sh. Bissa had issued the order of purchase to the extent of Rs. 10.915 lacks. According to the instructions dated 28.10.1988, the petitioner was authorised to issue purchase orders for Rs. 3 lacs to one firm and to issuing orders for more than Rs. 5 lacs, it was necessary for Bissa to have sought the prior permission of Chief Engineer. The petitioner Sh. Bissa had not taken the prior permission of the Chief Engineer and had placed the orders of Rs. 10.915 lacks and thus admittedly he had violated the instructions. Even though these orders were strictly within the limit of Rs. 3 lacs to one firm, but still he had violated the Govt. instruction dated 28.10.1988 and allegations against him, therefore approved.'