Ajit Kumar Pandey vs The Bihar State Warehousing Corporation & Ors.

“A. For issuing writ of certiorari and thereby quashing the order bearing Office Order No 405 dated 31.12.2019 issued by the Respondent No.3 whereby and whereunder the direction for recovery of Rs.24,78,052/- has been which has taken affect through letter dated 18.03.2016 from the retiral benefits of the petitioner has been affirmed.

B. For issuing writ of certiorari and thereby quashing resolution dated 15.12.2019 whereby and whereunder the Board of Directors in suppression to the earlier resolution dated 25.02.2019 has a taken decision to authorizing the Managing Director to thoroughly consider the developments and materials regarding the petitioner and thereafter submitting the compliance upon taking necessary action in regarding the recovery to be made from the petitioner.

C. For issuing writ of certiorari and thereby quashing the show cause notice bearing Letter no 1335 dated 30.07.2015 issued by the Respondent No.2 whereby and whereunder even after superannuation of the petitioner show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner in relation to an incident relating to year 2000 (15 years prior to issuance of show cause notice) and even upon superannuation of the petitioner (petitioner superannuated on 28.02.2015) when there was no employer employee relationship in existence.

D. For holding that there cannot be an enquiry proceedings drawn against the petitioner by issuing show cause notice dated 30.07.2015 when there exist no employer employee relationship between the petitioner and Respondent Corporation.

E. For holding that the impugned order bearing Office Order No 405 dated 31.12.2019 is bad in law as there is no provision under the Bihar State Warehousing Corporation (Staffs) Rules, 1958 which provides source of power to the Respondent Corporation from the post retiral benefits of the employee much less from the gratuity and the earned leave of the superannuated employee.

F. For holding that the recovery proceedings as also the issuance of the show cause notice for such recovery as also recovery from the retiral benefits of the petitioner is against the law laid down by Hon'ble Patna High Court in CWJC No.11254/2017 wherein vide order dated 15.01.2018 the Hon'ble Court has clarified in relation to Respondent Corporation that since there is no provision in the Bihar State Warehousing Corporation (Staffs Regulation 1958 which could empower the Respondent Corporation to departmentally proceed against the petitioner or any ex-employee towards any financial irregularity and recovered the amount on the basis of order passed in relation to the alleged misconduct in the show cause notice or memo of charge constituted towards the misconduct of financial irregularity on the ex-employee.

G. For issuing appropriate writ including writ of mandamus directing the respondent Corporation to release the withheld amount of Rs.24,78,052/- which has been wrongly recovered by the Respondent Corporation without there being any source of power to recover or withhold such post retrial benefits of the petitioner.

H. For issuing appropriate including writ of mandamus granting suitable interest on of Rs.24,78,052/- which has been wrongly withheld (from the retiral benefits of the petitioner) by the Respondent Corporation without there being any source of power to withheld such post retrial benefits of the petitioner.

I. For holding that the Respondent Corporation had no authority to withhold the gratuity, pension and leave encashment cumulatively to the tune of Rs.24,78,052/-in view of the fact that the aforesaid amount has been withheld/recovered without there being any source of power with the Respondent Corporation to recover/withheld such amount from the gratuity or the retiral benefits of the petitioner.

J. The Hon'ble Court may pass any other order/orders which it may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and within the ends of equity, justice and good conscience.”