Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 15.07.2013, passed by the Deputy Secretary (Vigilance) to the Government, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been inflicted with the punishment of deduction of 25% pension and 25% gratuity permanently, as also it has been directed that the petitioner shall not be paid anything else, apart from the subsistence allowance already paid to him, during the period of suspension.

Facts of the Case:-

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner was appointed as the Engineer Assistant in the Road Construction Department in the year 1971, however, the said post was merged with the post of Assistant Engineer in the year 1975. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on 06.7.1999 and he was posted at the Road Division, Biharsharif from 06.07.1999 to 30.06.2001, whereafter, he was transferred to the Ganga Bridge Project and finally, he superannuated from service on 31.07.2007. The petitioner is stated to have been suspended on 19.5.2006, whereafter, a memo of charge dt. 1.8.2006 was issued, wherein eight charges were levelled against the petitioner, however, five of them are relevant, hence only five charges are being recited in brief, herein below: –

Charge No. 01 – In the Biharsharif-Ekangarsarai-Telhara project, the sanctioned amount of bitumen in the BOQ (Bill of Quantity) was 1492.21 Metric Ton (MT), against which petitioner issued 1624.28 MT of bitumen to the contractor. Thus the local officers, without estimating the amount of bitumen to be consumed in the works/project, issued excess bitumen to the contractor causing financial gain to him. Petitioner also appears to be guilty of not following Clause 15 of Letter No. 2347 dated 31.12.1983, issued by the Technical Examination Cell of the Cabinet Vigilance Department, according to which it is the responsibility of the concerned JE/AE/EE to supervise whether materials given to the contractor are being misused or not and that excess material is not lying with the contractor, after use/ consumption.

Charge No. 02 – For the Biharsharif- Ekangarsarai-Telhara Road work, 707.726 MT bitumen was used out of total quantity of 1624.28 MT, issued to the contractor. For recovery of the balance quantity of 916.554 MT, the petitioner is stated to have recommended that the same be recovered from the contractor @ Rs. 5838/- Per MT, but as per the measurement, qua the last bill, i.e. 13th bill, the total amount of bitumen consumed appears to be 572.22 MT. Thus, cost of 1624.28 – 572.22= 1052.06 MT should have been recovered at the penal rate of 5838x2= Rs. 11,676 per MT, i.e totaling to a sum of Rs. 1,22,83,853/- but only a sum of Rs. 13,59,915/- was recovered. Thus, the petitioner appears to be guilty of not recovering a sum of Rs. 1,09,23,938/- from the contractor. He also appears to be guilty of violation of Clause 18 of Letter No. 2347 dated 31.12.1983, issued by the Technical Examination Cell of the Cabinet Vigilance Department, according to which, before making payment of bill to the contractor, there is provision for grant of the following certificate regarding measurement approval and verification- "For the work done till this bill, the price/ value of the materials given to the contractor has been deducted from his bill and till now, whatever material has been used in the work, the value thereof has been adjusted against the allotment made for the work”.

Charge No. 03 – In the spot-inspection, conducted by the enquiry officer of the Technical Examination Cell of the Cabinet Vigilance Department on 20.11.2002 and 21.11.2002, it was found that the road (Bihar sharif-Ekangarsarai-Telhara) was in a bad shape and the work had not been done as per the prescribed standards, hence the entire amount spent on the road has been wasted. In this manner, the Junior Engineer/ Assistant Engineer and Executive Eng