1. With consent of the parties, matter is heard finally at motion stage.

2. Petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order dated 29/30.4.2014 issued by respondent No.2. The petitioner is a retired employee of the respondent/Food Corporation of India. He was appointed on the post of Peon in the respondent/Food Corporation of India in the year 1976. During his service tenure, he was promoted to various posts and ultimately vide order dated 8.5.2013 he was promoted to the post of Assistant General Manager. The petitioner retired w.e.f. 30.4.2014 on attaining the age of superannuation. Thereafter, the FCI Head Office vide order dated 29.4.2014 informed the petitioner that he was retired on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 30.4.2014. Accordingly, the petitioner was retired and relieved from his services of the Food Corporation of India w.e.f. 30.4.2014 afternoon. On the last date of his services, the petitioner went to Seoni on tour after intimating his Official Staff by the vehicle hired by FCI and reached Seoni at about 1:30. p.m. The petitioner, thereafter inspected the FSD Units at Seoni at around 3:00 pm. The petitioner was free from the Seoni Depot work, thereafter, till 8 pm, the petitioner was busy in the work of registration of de-mortgage and got out after registry from the Registrar Office, Seoni. Thereafter, the petitioner reached back to the Jabalpur at about 9:30 p.m. and submitted Inspection Report. The petitioner, thereafter received a letter dated 7/15.5.2014 issued by the Regional Office Bhopal for initiation of Departmental Enquiry against him and thereafter vide letter dated 19.6.2014 an Enquiry Officer was appointed for conducting enquiry against the petitioner on 6.7.2014. The petitioner replied to the said charg-sheet stating that he has not received any chargesheet during his services and he was retired on 30.4.2014 afternoon.

3. Vide letter dated 5.11.2014, the respondents have replied to the said letter issued by the petitioner alleging that the petitioner has avoided receiving of the chargesheet, therefore, he was advised to present his case before the Enquiry Officer. The petitioner vide letter dated 5.11.2014 has gave replied to the said letter. Thereafter, vide letter dated 29.5.2014 issued by the respondents, the representation submitted by the petitioner has been rejected. As the respondents have not paid the amount of CPF gratuity, leave encashment to the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, submitted a representation but no action has been taken. Being aggrieved by the said chargesheet and the departmental enquiry, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. The respondents have filed their reply and stated that the chargesheet was issued to the petitioner under Regulation 58 of FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971 (hereinafter referred as to the Regulation).

5. On 29.4.2014 memorandum was issued to him through his official E-mail ID on 30.4.2014 at 12:04 pm as well as through registered post at the notified residential address as per service records and by speed post in the petitioner’s alternate address. It has been further stated that the Committee of three Officers of the FCI, Regional Office, Bhopal visited the petitioner’s residential address and pasted the said memorandum on the front outside wall near main gate. At the relevant time when the chargesheet was issued to the petitioner, he was functioning as Area Manager of FCI District Office, Jabalpur. Another committee of three officers from District Office, Jabalpur also visited on the residential house of the petitioner at about 5:45 p.m. on 30.4.2014 at Jabalpur and pasted the said memorandum on the door of house. It has further been stated that as per Regulation 75 of FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971 every order, notice and other process made or issued under this regulation shall as far as possible be delivered or tendered to the employees concerned in person or through registered post. It has been further sub