JUDGMENT :

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation.

2. In respect of some irregularities at the godowns of the respondent Food Corporation of India, the petitioners were proceeded against. The charges were in respect of ill maintenance of the godown of the Corporation. Non maintenance of stock register and non maintenance of documents showing receipt of food grains at the godown was also alleged.

3. Petitioners 1 and 2 were exonerated in the proceedings conducted against them. Petitioner No. 3 was awarded a minor punishment of censure by order dated 07.03.2014 of the Disciplinary Authority. Petitioners 1 and 2 are Assistant Grade II category (hereinafter referred to as Cat II) whereas petitioner No. 3 was in Cat III of the respondent Corporation. The writ petition has been filed since the order passed in the departmental proceeding on 7.3.2014 by the General Manager (Region) of the FCI has been reviewed by a decision dated 4.1.2019 passed by the Executive Director (East) FCI (respondent No. 3). Power of review has been exercised under Regulation 74 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulation 1971. It is this exercise of power of review which is impugned in the instant proceedings.

4. This Court would consider it useful to reproduce relevant provisions since the relief claimed in the instant writ petition would rest on the scope and object of Rule 74 and whether it permitted such review after a period of five years in the facts and circumstances of the instant case:-

74. Review:

(1) (Notwithstanding anything contained in these regulations, the Board may, at any time either on its own motion or otherwise, call for the records of any inquiry and review any order made under these regulations), and

(a) confirm, modify or set aside the order; or

(b) confirm, reduce, enhance or set aside the penalty imposed by the order, or impose any penalty where no penalty has been imposed; or

(c) Remit the case to the authority which made the order or to any other authority directing such authority to make such further inquiry as it may consider proper in the circumstances of the case; or

(d) pass such other orders as it may deem fit;

Provided that no order imposing or enhancing any penalty shall be made by the reviewing authority unless the employee concerned has been given a reasonable opportunity of making a representation against the penalty proposed and where it is proposed to impose any of the penalties specified in clauses (v) to (ix) of Regulation 54 or to enhance the penalty imposed by the order sought to be viewed to any of the penalties specified in those clauses; no such penalty shall be imposed except after an inquiry in the manner laid down in Regulation 58.

(2) No proceeding for review shall be commenced until after:

(i) the expiry of the period of limitation for an appeal, or

(ii) the disposal of the appeal, where any such appeal has been preferred.

(3) An application for review shall be dealt with in the same manner as if it were an appeal under these regulations.

(4) Powers similar to those specified in clause(1) above may be exercised by the (Chairman)*, Managing Director, Zonal Manager (Additional)/ Joint Manager) in respect of orders passed by authorities subordinate to them.

5. Bare perusal of Regulation 74 of FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971 would show that the same provides discretion to the Board to exercise the power of review “at any time”. The discretion has to be exercised on its own motion or otherwise after calling for the records of enquiry.

6. Petitioners’ Counsel submits that the manner in which the discretion has been exercised is contrary to the object and purport of Rule 74. The expression “at any time” cannot be implemented in the way it has been done in the case of the petitioners. After a detailed and thorough enquiry the disciplinary proceedings concluded by order dated 7.8.2014. The petitioners were subsequently considered for, and also granted one p