M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This judgment shall dispose of instant petition bearing C.W.P. No. 11662 of 2004 and other 29 connected writ petitions (for details see footnote at the end of this judgment) as common question of law and facts have been raised. For understanding the contour of controversy, the facts are being referred from C.W.P. No. 11662 of 2004.

2. Challenge in this bunch of petitions is to the charge sheet issued by the Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited (for brevity, the Markfed) leveling allegation that the petitioners in connivance with other staff are responsible for the shortage of paddy, which has been allegedly embezzled. There are allegations that the petitioner by his acts of omission and commission has caused huge loss amounting to crores of rupees. For the sake of convenience, the charge sheet issued to the petitioner in C.W.P. No. 11662 of 2004, is referred and the same reads as under:

CHARGES IN BRIEF AGAINST SH. M.P. DOGRA, FO/BR INCHARGE. He is alleged to be

guilty for causing loss of Rs. 1,81,41,199.77 relating to paddy crop 97-98 in

connivance with S/Shri Raj Singh, F.O. and Gurcharan Singh, F.O. (Retd.),

which is a seriou