The Punjab State Cooperative Supply Marketing Federation Ltd. vs Additional Registrar (Administration), Cooperative Societies and Another

K. Kannan, J.—The writ petition challenges the order passed in revision exonerating the charged officer as being responsible for pilferage of

stocks. Reversing the order passed by the disciplinary authority and confirming the finding of the enquiry officer, the Revisional authority held that

the charged officer had not been involved in a matter of verification of stocks and that further the charged officer was not responsible for the

pilferage. He took note of the fact that though the charged officer was notionally said to be a joint custodian with one Gurtej Singh, latter had

actually admitted that he alone was responsible for the loss and that the stocks had been held by him in single lock system. In exonerating the

officer the authority also adverted to the fact that he was actually working at the headquarters at Gehal while the stocks were lying at Kotduna

which was about 50 K.Ms away from the headquarters. There are cogent reasons in the order of the Additional Registrar in his finding that the

charge had not been proved. Even a technical objection that the Additional Registrar did not have a power to act as a Registrar was considered by

this Court in CWP No. 333 of 1992 titled as The Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited Vs. Uttam Singh and

another through its judgment dated 23.3.1994 and rejected such an objection.

There is no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed.