CWP No. 22813-2014

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No. 22813-2014

Date of decision : 10.10.2018

Rajeev Kohli

...Petitioner

versus

Chd Ind. & Tourism Dev. Corp & ors.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate

for the respondents.

****

RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)

In the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing

of order dated 06.08.2014 (Annexure P-9) vide which a de novo inquiry has

been ordered against the petitioner.

Brief facts of the case are that petitioner in his capacity as

President of the Employees Union submitted a representation dated

14.03.2011 for review of the policy in view of huge pilferage of petrol was

found by Internal Auditors. The matter was examined and as per standing

guidelines, it was held that annual verification has to be got carried out on

the last date of every financial year, as per meeting note (Annexure P-2).

The Board of Director on 29.06.1994 in agenda at item No. 88.9 took a

conscious decision that in the event of shortage in fuel at petrol station, only

operational staff would be responsible and recoveries are to be made from

them, by following the norms fixed by Government of India under “The

Gaurav Arora

2018.10.17 14:04

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Chandigarh

CWP No. 22813-2014

-2-

Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Prevention of Mal Practice in supply

and distribution) order, 1990.

The petitioner was posted at Petrol Station Sector 9 as Clerk

and was not assigned any supervisory work. As a counter blast to the

representation submitted by the petitioner, a surprise physical verification

was carried out at CITCO Petrol Station Sector 9 on 10.01.2012 in the

middle of the year, as per verification report (Annexure P-4). The petitioner

was then charge sheeted vide memo dated 12.09.2012 in respect of shortage

of fund of petrol and diesel (Annexure P-5) and petitioner gave his reply

dated 20.12.2012 (Annexure P-6). Accordingly, Managing Director of the

CITCO ordered holding of an regular enquiry through I.M. Khunger, IAS

(Retd.) vide office order dated 10.05.2013 (Annexure P-7). One Ramesh

Chander, Jr. Salesman who was part of operational staff at Sector 9, Petrol

Pump was also charge sheeted along with petitioner, in the light of decision

of Board of Directors dated 29.06.1994. The Enquiry Officer vide enquiry

report dated 04.03.2014 (Annexure P-8) found that the petitioner was not

responsible for the alleged shortage of petrol/diesel. None of the charge was

proved against the petitioner. It has been categorically held that petitioner

was only a Clerk and cannot be considered as an operational staff. In this

enquiry report, Ramesh Chander, Junior Salesman was found guilty but the

Corporation instead of accepting the enquiry report, issued office order

dated 06.08.2014 (Annexure P-9) by ordering de novo enquiry. Hence the

present writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned

order dated 06.08.2014 (Annexure P-9) is liable to be set aside, as firstly the

Gaurav Arora

2018.10.17 14:04

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Chandigarh

CWP No. 22813-2014

-3-

impugned order is against the decisions taken by Board of Directors on

29.06.1994 (Annexure P-2) wherein it was held that annual verification of

the Petrol Pump has to be got carried out on the last date of every financial

year. This decision was taken as there is greater evaporation during summer

and lesser in winter months, therefore, it is not possible to account for

evaporation in winter months. By taking into consideration this decision,

the Enquiry Officer has rightly dropped the charges against the petitioner

and hold guilty Ramesh Chander, Junior Salesman, which is also against the

decision.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further referred to a

decision taken by Bo