AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. Manjushree Patra, learned J. C. to A.A.G. (Mr. Himanshu Kumar Mehta).
Aggrieved by letter no. 376 dated 19.07.2014 issued by the respondent no. 2 by which liability of Rs. 1,82,374/- has been fixed upon the petitioner for causing damage to the food grains at Hiranpur Godown, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.
Sans the details, it appears that the petitioner was discharging his duty as Supply Inspector at Maheshpur Block from 05.07.2007 to 15.01.2008. A proposed proceeding was sought to be initiated against the petitioner vide memo no. 480 dated 08.12.2011 on the charge that the petitioner and the others have been negligent in their duty for causing financial loss to the Government with respect to rotten food grains having been found in the godown at Maheshpur. An amount of Rs. 1,82,374/- have been quantified by the respondent no. 2 being recoverable from the petitioner as contained in letter no. 376 dated 19.07.2014 which has caused the petitioner to prefer the present writ application.
Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that the entire process culminating in issuance of letter no. 376 dated 19.07.2014 was on account of an unilateral enquiry conducted by the respondents without offering any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It has also been submitted that the petitioner on verification had found the roof of the concerned godown leaking and apprehending destruction of the food grains stored in the godown he had intimated the respondent no. 2 vide letter dated 12.06.2008. Learned counsel submits that necessary and immediate action had been taken by the petitioner to prevent food grains stored in Hiranpur godown from getting rotted but without considering the facts as no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner the respondent no. 2 straight away proceeded to issue the impugned letter dated 19.07.2014 inflicting a punishment of recovery of Rs. 1,82,374/- from the petitioner.
Mrs. Manjushree Patra, learned J. C. to A.A.G., while supporting the impugned order dated 19.07.2014 has submitted that in the year 2006 a criminal case was registered against the transporters of the food grains who used to distribute the food grains in different godowns within the district of Pakur. Submission has been advanced that the petitioner was the In-charge of the godown and being negligent in keeping proper vigilance over the food grains stored in the godown loss was caused to the Government which subsequently resulted in issuance of the impugned letter.
It is not in dispute that the impugned letter dated 19.07.2014 was passed behind the back of the petitioner without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or on consideration of his defense. This fact has not been denied by the respondents. Moreover, three of the aggrieved persons in the impugned order dated 19.07.2014 had moved this Court in W.P.(S) No. 324 of 2015 in which the said letter had been quashed so far as it related to the petitioners of the said writ petition. Similar are the facts involved in the present writ application also and in such circumstances the impugned letter as contained in letter no. 376 dated 19.07.2014 is quashed and set aside so far as the petitioner is concerned.
It is informed at the bar that pursuant to the issuance of the impugned letter no recovery has been effected as yet against the petitioner. In such circumstances any decision which has to be taken by the respondents shall be done after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
The writ application is allowed and disposed of in terms mentioned above.