AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ
We had, in our order dated 23.07.2019, taken note of the limitless largesse, extended by the respondent-Corporation to its employees, in the form of unlimited supply of electricity, right from the Managing Director to employees in Group D. We had also noted that the respondent-Corporation was providing unlimited electricity not only to its employees but also to all employees of the Generating Company and the Transmission Corporations, and was charging them a measly sum ranging between Rs. 65/- to Rs.425/- per month for this unlimited supply of electricity. If Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, is to be believed even this amount, ranging between Rs.65/- to Rs.425/- per month, is not being recovered from the employees, but is adjusted under the Head "Medical Allowances" which, according to the learned Senior Counsel, is being provided in addition to the medical reimbursement being extended to the employees of the Corporation.
The submission of Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel, is that this loot of the public exchequer is being permitted to go unchecked ever since the State of Uttarakhand came into being till date; this facility of unlimited consumption of electricity is provided not only to an employee while he is in service but even after his retirement. In addition, this facility is being extended to such of his family members who are entitled to family pension after his death. On the other hand Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Counsel, would submit that this benefit is being extended only to employees in service and retired pensioners, and not to their family members.
While several other irregularities are highlighted in the writ petition, regarding misuse and mismanagement of funds by those at the helm of affairs of the Corporation, we shall confine our examination, for the present, to the allegation of abuse of authority, by the Power Corporation, in providing unlimited electricity to the aforesaid categories of employees. Even for judges of the High Court supply of electricity to their official residence is not unlimited, but is within prescribed consumption limits in terms of a certain number of units per annum. Consumption of electricity, beyond the prescribed limits, is required to be borne by each individual judge.
While employees of the Corporation can be provided electricity at concessional rates within prescribed limits, it is disconcerting that the Power Corporation should squander public money by supplying unlimited electricity to all its employees, and those employed in the Generating and Transmission Corporation also. The financial burden, for this unreasonable largesse, is being borne by the general public of the State of Uttarakhand, resulting in their having to pay a higher rate for each unit of electricity consumed by them.
What is also disconcerting is the attempts made by the Corporation at obfuscation. The counter affidavit filed by the Chief Engineer is extremely vague. It does not specifically deal with the allegations made, and the contentions raised, in the writ petition. Even from this counter affidavit it does appear that, while a electricity meter was installed in the residence of the General Manger in the year 2005, no reading appears to have been taken for 11 years therafter till the year 2016. The petitioner alleges in his writ affidavit that, in several cases, electricity meters, installed in the residence of employees, are non-functional; and, even in those few cases where the electricity meter is in order, meter reading is seldom resorted to.
Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel, would contend that a vague counter affidavit has been filed only to avoid furnishing information to this Court regarding the quantum of electricity consumed by senior officials of the Corporation including its Managing Director, and the officers and employees of the other corporations. When we asked Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Power Corporation, as to why the allegations in the writ affidavit have not been dealt with, learned Senior Counsel would complain of paucity of time, and state that it is only the specific queries raised by this Court, in its order dated 23.07.2019, which have been dealt with, and not the other allegations in the writ petition.
We were initially inclined to direct that a comprehensive audit be caused of the respondents-corporation's books of accounts, including the expenditure incurred by it in supplying unlimited electricity, virtually free of cost, to its serving employees and those who have retired from service, and officers and employees of other Corporations. We refrain from doing so, for the present, in the light of the submission of Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Counsel, that a detailed counter affidavit would be filed within one week from today explaining why such irrational benefits are being provided not only to its serving and retired employees, but also to officers and employees of the Generating and Transmission Corporation also.
Learned senior counsel would also state that the respondent-corporation would examine the feasibility of placing limits on consumption of electricity by its employees either in terms of value or in terms of the units consumed.
As it is necessary to ascertain the views of the State Government in this regard, we consider it appropriate to, suo-motu, implead the Government of Uttarakhand represented by its Secretary, Energy as the fourth respondent in the writ petition. The Secretary, Energy, Government of Uttarakhand shall file an affidavit explaining the rationale in permitting such unlimited consumption of electricity, when such benefits are not being provided to other categories of Government servants.
Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel who is present in Court today, takes notice on behalf of the fourth respondent. Mr. Mohd Matlub, learned counsel for the petitioner, shall furnish a set of papers in the writ petition and Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Counsel, shall furnish a copy of the counter affidavit and its enclosures to Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, latest by tomorrow.
Post this case on 14.11.2019 in the daily list immediately after "fresh admission matters".
Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties, by 07.11.2019, on payment of the prescribed charges.