IMPORTANT POINT
Departmental proceedings against retired employees must comply with Article 351-A, requiring Governor's sanction and adherence to time limits for validity.

JUDGMENT :

J.J. Munir, J.

This writ petition is directed against an order dated 13.3.2020 passed by the Deputy Director, Administration and Distribution, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, U.P., Kanpur, ordering initiation of departmental proceedings against the petitioner, a retired Mandi Nirikshak. A writ of mandamus is also prayed by the petitioner to be issued, commanding the Secretary, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, Kanpur Nagar to pay a sum of Rs. 1,33,000 towards the petitioner's salary, revised according to the Seventh Pay Commission and a sum of Rs. 1,42,000 in gratuity, alongwith interest at the rate of 10% per annum.

2. The facts giving rise to the writ petition show, in substance, that the petitioner was a Mandi Nirikshak in the employ of the Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad. He retired from service, upon attaining the age of superannuation, on 31.5.2016. The petitioner belonged to the Uttar Pradesh Agricultural Produce Market Committees Centralized Services. The conditions of the petitioner's service were governed and regulated by the Uttar Pradesh Agricultural Produce Market Committees (Centralized Services) Regulations, 1984 ('the Regulations of 1984' for short).

3. On 24.9.2019, an explanation was sought from the petitioner by the Secretary, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, U.P., Kanpur relating to the issue of a Mandi License to a certain firm by the name of M/s. Baba Anandeshwar Trading Company, wholesale traders and stockists. Business was done by the said firm during the agricultural years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The details of matters, regarding which the petitioner's explanation was sought, can best be appreciated by a reference to the material part of the memo dated 24.4.2019 issued by the Secretary, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, U.P., Kanpur, which reads :

4. On 21.5.2019, another notice was issued to the petitioner by the Secretary, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, saying that according to the orders passed by the Mandi Parishad Headquarters, which were issued with reference to the petitioner's claim for arrears of the Seventh Pay Commission, it was mentioned that the firm, M/s. Baba Anandeshwar Trading Company, had indulged in evasion of Mandi Fee and Development Cess, and for the purpose, a recovery certificate had been issued against the said firm. The sum of money, for which the recovery certificate had been issued against the firm, could not be realized, and on this account, a First Information Report ('FIR' for short) was lodged against the petitioner as well. It was also mentioned that on account of non-realization of Mandi Fee from the firm, recovery from the petitioner was also contemplated. In the circumstances, the Secretary directed stoppage of payment of the petitioner's dues. It was also remarked that the claim and the allegations made by the petitioner regarding withholding of his emoluments and related benefits was concocted and without basis. The petitioner's application made to the Mandi Parishad for realization of his arrears and related dues etc. was said to be rejected by the said notice dated 21.5.2019.

5. The petitioner submitted a reply both to the memo dated 24.4.2019 calling his explanation as well as the notice/communication dated 21.5.2019, copies whereof are annexed as Annexures Nos. 3 and 5 to the writ petition. The petitioner's reply in answer to the notice dated 21.5.2019 bears a seal of receipt dated 30.5.2019. The petitioner's stand was that he was posted at Kanpur Nagar from 18.2.2015 to 18.6.2015. During this period of time, the firm under reference did not carry on any trade or business. As such, there was no liability incurred by the firm on account of Mandi Fee etc. by then. It was submitted that the firm's license was renewed on 16.6.2015. On 18.6.2015, the petitioner was transferred from Kanpur Nagar to Jhansi and until then, there was no evasion by the firm concerned. The period of evasion was from July 2015 to April 2016, by which time, the pe