R.D. Bansal v. Haryana State Federation Of Consumers Co-Operative Wholesale Stores Ltd.

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 09.02.2016 R.D. Bansal ....Petitioner

Versus

Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd.

....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Jaiswal, Advocate for the respondent.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of charge-sheet dated 18.10.2012 (Annexure P-28) as there is no provision under the Staff Service Rules of The Haryana State Federation of Consumer's Cooperative Wholesale Stores Ltd., 1975 (hereinafter to referred as 'the Rules, 1975') to charge-sheet or hold disciplinary proceedings against a retired employee as per judgments of this Court (Annexures P-32 & P-36) and directions to the respondents to expedite and finalize the disciplinary proceedings initiated pursuant to the Charge-sheets dated 02.03.2005 (Annexure P-1),

-205.02.2009 (Annexure P-7), 17.03.2009 (Annexure P-10), 20.07.2009 (Annexure P-14), 19.01.2010 (Annexure P-20) and 28.12.2010 (Annexure P-23) and further directions to release all the retiral dues as per law and not to withhold ACPs merely on account of the charge-sheets. Learned cousnel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was retired on 30.09.2011 and at the time of retirement some charge-sheets were pending against him. One charge-sheet was issued after his retirement on 18.10.2012 (Annexure P-28), which is legally not permissible. During the pendency of this petition, charge-sheet dated 21.10.2005 (Annexure P-1) has been finalized, vide order dated 17.07.2014 (Annexure P-34) and some recovery has been sought from the petitioner. Another charge-sheet dated 28.12.

2012 (Annexure P-23) has also been finalized with a recovery of `4.25 crores against the petitioner, vide order dated 28.04.2015 (Annexure P-35). As para No.3 of the replication, the following chargesheets were pending:- Date of Charge-Sheet Annexure in the Writ Petition Issued before or after retirement i) 05.02.2009 Annexure P-7 Before retirement ii) 17.03.2009 Annexure P-10 Before retirement iii) 20.07.2009 Annexure P-14 Before retirement iv) 19.01.2010 Annexure P-20 Before retirement v) 18.10.2012 Annexure P-28 After retirement The dispute in the present writ petition which requires for consideration is that whether charge-sheet can be issued after the retirement.

Identical view has already been decided by this Court by way of CWP No.1873 of 2014 titlted Jogi Ram Vs. Haryana State Federation

-3of Consumer's Co-operative Wholesale Stores, decided on 23.05.2014 (Annexure P-36), wherein, it was held that there is no provision in the Rules 1975 as to the issuance of charge-sheet or imposing a penalty upon an employee after retirement. The similar view was also gone before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Chandra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and another, 2003(6) SCC 545 and this Court in S.S. Arya Vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Panchkula and others, 2009(8) SLR 53. In view of the facts and law position as mentioned above, the present petition is allowed and the impugned charge-sheet dated 18.10.2012 (Annexure P-28) is set aside. Further direction is given to the respondent to conclude the proceedings in the charge-sheets dated 05.02.2009 (Annexure P-7), 17.03.2009 (Annexure P-10), 20.07.2009 (Annexure P-14) and 19.01.2010 (Annexure P-20), within a period of six months.

However, on finalization of the said charge-sheets, the petitioner shall be at liberty to claim his retiral benefits in accordance with law.

February 09, 2016 ( RITU BAHRI ) naresh.k JUDGE