BABITA BHATTACHARJEE Vs. TRIPURA KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These proceedings are interconnected. They have been heard together and would be disposed of by this common judgment. Appellants of the writ appeal are widow and son respectively of deceased Swapan Bhattacharjee who was an employee of the Tripura Khadi and Village Industries Board (Khadi Board, for short). At the relevant time he was discharging the duties of the Supervisor (Village Oil). On the ground of alleged irregularities in maintaining stock while he was functioning as Incharge, Central Store, Carpentry and Blacksmith Unit under the Board during the period between 06.04.2009 to 14.07.2013 and on certain other allegations of misconduct he was placed under suspension on 18.09.2014 pending initiation of departmental proceedings. He remained under suspension till the order of suspension was revoked on 23.04.2016. In the meantime, the employer issued a charge-sheet on 16.06.2015 in which three distinct charges were levelled against him. First charge was regarding leaving the duty without handing over charge. Second charge was of similar nature of not handing over the charge and completing the paper work after resuming duty. Under Charge Article-III which was more serious in nature it was alleged that out of the purchase of Rs.45.99 lakhs (rounded off) of wood and timber, stock worth Rs.19.48 lakhs (rounded off) was found deficit. This was attributed to the misuse of official power by the employee.

(2.) The employee denied the charges. For years together no substantial progress was made in the departmental proceedings. The delinquent officer expired on 13.09.2018. The department was, therefore, forced to close the inquiry proceedings.

(3.) While the departmental inquiry was thus instituted but without making any worthwhile progress, the Khadi Board passed an order on 21.06.2016 ordering recovery of a sum of Rs.18,93,316/- from the pay and allowances of the said employee on the ground that due to his conduct and mismatch of the stock the Board had suffered loss to the said extent. Admittedly before passing this order, no show-cause notice or any other opportunity of hearing was granted to the employee. After service of the order dated 21.06.2016 said Shri Swapan Bhattacharjee made a detailed representation to the Board on 02.07.2016 in which he raised several contentions. He contended that no hearing was granted to him before passing the recovery order. He pointed out that recovery would amount to imposition of punishment which could not have been done without holding inquiry. He also contended that the departmental proceedings in which causing loss deliberately was the charge, has not yet been concluded. He, therefore, requested that the said order be withdrawn. Since Khadi Board did not respond to this representation, he filed WP(C) No.765 of 2016 challenging the recovery order dated 21.06.2016.