HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 21828 OF 2017

ORDER:

The challenge mounted in this Writ Petition is to the notice dated 25.5.2017 issued by the 2^nd respondent purportedly informing about conduct of de novo enquiry against petitioner and appointment of Inquiry Officer.

2. The brief facts of the case are:-

Petitioner was appointed as a Packer-cum-Helper in

1981; thereafter, he was promoted as Sales Assistant and Junior Manager in 2009. It is stated, during physical verification held on 31.03.2010, a deficit in stocks to the tune of Rs.6,41,653.20 ps. was noticed in APCO SE, Sanga Reddy and petitioner, the then Junior Manager, who was only available employee in the unit was made responsible for the said deficit. Charges were framed against by the Divisional Marketing Officer, Secunderabad dated 08.11.2020. They are:

Charge No.1: That, he has created physical stock deficit of Rs.6,41,653.20 ps as on 31.3.2010 in Sanga Reddy SE, and caused loss to the APCO Society which is gross misconduct governing Rule No.43 XI of the Special Bye-laws of APCO employees.

Charge No.2: He has failed to maintain stock ledges up-to date manually or the computerization of stock position as on 31.3.2010 intentionally to cover deficit.

Though enquiry was initiated by central office vide proceedings dated 09.03.2011 and Enquiry Report dated 25.04.2011 was submitted, at the instance of petitioner, the issue was referred for conducting de-novo enquiry duly appointing another Enquiry Officer vide proceedings dated 18.05.2015. The reason appears to be at the behest of the letter addressed by petitioner stating that at the time of joining of Sri V. Sudarshan, Senior Manager, Sri. T. Vykuntam (petitioner herein) had handed over stocks and as per the stock list, the said Sudarshan alone was holding the charge.

The Enquiry Officer afforded opportunity of cross-

examination to both the sides and after a detailed enquiry, gave his findings in vide report dated 23.06.2015, relevant portion of the same is extracted hereunder:

“ The charged employee has requested the complaint Authority to arrange for the re-verification of the transactions of the unit ever since joining of Sri.V. Sudharsan, Sr. Mangar in APCO SE, Sangareddy. The Management Representative/Management Witness did not presented any statements of re-verifications which reveals that no re-verification got conducted.

Further it is also not established whether Sri. V. Sudhrasan, Sr. Manager, quitted with the stock responsibility at APCO SE, Sangareddy either while goint on leave/absconding or atleast before joining in newly transferred place i.e., Abids HLH, since the HOC, TOC is inevitable to decide the possessing or non possessing of the stock responsibility.

As can be seen from R(a) form dated 31.03.2007, the charged employee had not signed at TOC on par with Sri V. Sudharsan, Senior Manager, thereby it is construed that the charged employee discharged from the charge of stocks etcetera held in APCO SE, Sanga Reddy as on 31.03.2007 and appears that charged employee was not only attending to his duty as Sales Assistant but also representing Sri. V. Sudharsan, Senior Manager (leave/absconding). Hence it cannot be decided evidently that both worked with joint responsibility in the unit, from 31.3.2007 onwards.

Further it is observed that, though sri V. Sudharsan Sr.

Manager went on leave/absconding as the case may be was transferred to Abids HLH, the office could have procedurally insisted him first to join at APCO SE, Sangareddy and got relieved from the stock responsibility held by him in the unit, since, Sri. V. Sudharsan holds responsibility on stocks during his leave period as he was not handed over the charge of stocks while going on leave or before joining at new place i.e., Abids HLH, procedurally by way of HOC/TOC process.

Sri V. Sudharsan, Sr. Manager, while on leave/absconding has not given the charge of stocks held in the unit as on the date of his leaving the unit, since it was not est