Laxmidhar Pradhan vs State or Orissa and Others

Heard Mr. Soubhagya Sundar Das, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. A. Mishra, Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State & Mr. S.K. Pattnaik, Learned Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties 2 to 4. This Writ Petition has been filed for quashing of the impugned Orders Dated 7.3.2001 (Annexure-10)& dated 30.7.2001 (Annexure-11) passed by the Opp. Party No. 4 directing recovery from the salary of the Petitioner.

Case of the Petitioner is that while he was working as Sales Attendant in the General Section at Balasore Central Depot of Orissa State Handloom''s Weavers Co-operative Society limited, since one of the incumbent was transferred to another place, Opp. Party No. 3 vide Annexure-1 directed the Petitioner to take over the charges of the stocks of Balasore Central Depot from the transferred employee. Pursuant to the said direction of Opp. Party No. 3, the Petitioner vide Annexure-2 represented the Opp. Party No. 3, to avoid future-difficulties, that the stock at Central Depot was absolutely damaged & had lost its tensile strength. Thereafter, the Petitioner received a conditional direction (under Annexure-3) that if he will not comply the order under Annexure-1, disciplinary action will be initiated against him without further notice, he being left with no other alternative had to take charge of the stock on 16.12.1998.

After taking over the charges, the Petitioner on 22.12.98 (Annexure-6) intimated Opp. Party No. 3 to shift the damaged cloth amounting to Rs. 12,075.50 & unusable damaged yarn to the tune of Rs. 87,268.00 to Central Depot of the Head Office on the ground that such stock could never be sold in the market & if it retained for further period, there would be further loss. Thereafter, on 19.1.2000 (Annexure-7), Opp. Party No. 2 directed the Petitioner to shift the stock to Balasore Sale Depot since it was decided to close the Central Depot at Balasore & after shifting, under Annexure-8, the Petitioner again represented to Opp. Party No. 2 to shift the damaged stock to ''Bhubaneswar.

Thereafter, the stock was assessed to be of Rs. 72,692.30 & under Annexure-9, it was communicated to the Petitioner that the stock returned by him was revalued by the revaluation committee & the same was revalued at Rs. 46,370.18. As per the impugned order passed under Annexure-10, it was decided to recover an amount of Rs. 26,322.12 from the Petitioner pursuant to which the order under Annexure-11 was passed directing recovery of Rs. .1,400 per month from the salary of the Petitioner in nineteen instalments. Again the Petitioner made representations under Annexure-13 & 14 to consider his case & requested for refund of the recovered amount. Hence, the Writ Petition.

Learned Counsel for the Opp. Parties filed a counter indicating therein that the Writ Petition is not maintainable & the recovery has been done rightly as the stocks were damaged. In support of his contention, he relied upon the resolution passed by the Board of Directors on 2.8.1995 under Annexure-B to the Counter affidavit in which it was decided that the custodians of the stock would be responsible for the safe storage of the stock.

Perused the records. It is revealed from Annexure-A to the counter affidavit that the Petitioner received the stock from his successor on 16.12.1998 & from the said annexure, it appears that except item No. 1, all other items were received either in damaged condition or unusable condition & at the time of receiving the stock, no valuation was made. The recovery has been made without determining the responsibility for the damage of the stock & without considering the representations made by the Petitioner immediately after taking the charge of the stock.

In the resolution relied upon by the Opp. Parties, it has " been decided to take appropriate action against the person concerned for damage of the stock. Admittedly, no show-cause has been issued to the Petitioner & he has not been given any opportunity to explain the same before passing the impugned order. For the reasons stated above, this Court comes to the conclusion that the recovery has been directed without any basis. Accordingly, the impugned Orders Dated 7.3.2001 & 30.7.2001 passed by Opp. Party No. 4 under Annexures-10 & 11 respectively are quashed & the Opp. Parties are directed to refund the amount already recovered from the salary of the Petitioner along with simple interest at rate of 9% per annum from the date of recovery within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

The Writ Petition is allowed. Issue urgent certified copy Petition allowed.