KARUR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR (APPEAL)
LAWS(MAD)-2020-3-216
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on March 10,2020

Karur Agricultural Producers Appellant
VERSUS
Deputy Commissioner Of Labour (Appeal) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent, dated 30.12.2011 made in Appeal T.S.C.No.1 of 2011, who is the Appellate Authority (Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeal), Dindigul under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act, 1947.
(2.) The petitioner's Society is a Karur Agricultural Producers Co- operative Marketting Society Limited registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The said society is having more than 45 fair price shops under its control. One Mr.S.Jeyaraj was employed as a salesman and worked in the fair price shops under Public Distribution System in Seethapathi Colony and Kodaiyur as a Salesman during the period 06.06.2007 and 27.07.2009. He was indulged in malpractices and caught red handed during the inspection conducted by the District Supply Officer when the salesman with his accomplishes transported illegally 86 bags of ration rice meant for public distribution to the downtrodden people of the state. The vehicle which was involved in illiit transportation to sell the rice in black market through Tempo XLIV bearing registration No.TN 33 M 1363 also impounded. The culprits including the salesman S.Jeyaraj were arrested on 27.07.2009 and remanded into judicial custody.
(3.) On the basis of stock verification reports given by two staffs of the society and supported by the inspection report of the Taluk Supply Officer, stock deficit and cash misappropriation were detected. The District Collector has also issued orders detaining him under prevention of Black Marketting and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 by his order in Crl.M.P.No.2 of 2009 (CS), dated 07.08.2009. On the basis of the reports received from the staffs of the society for the serious irregularities and misappropriation, he was suspended from 28.07.2009 by the proceedings, dated 28.07.2009. The explanation was called for from the second respondent. Not satisfied with the explanation, charge-memo has been issued and the domestic enquiry was ordered. The Dosmestic Enquiry Officer has conducted the enquiry and given his report on 09.08.2010. Further explanation is sought from the second respondent by supplying a copy of the enquiry report. Not satisfied with his explanation, further opportunity is afforded to the second respondent before passsing the final order. The second respondent in his explanation has categorically admitted his liability that due to his wife's ill-health he mis-utilised the sales amount for her treatment. Hence, it was conclusively prove that he has admitted the charges and prayed for the employment. The criminal case is pending against him in Cr.No.329 of 2009 under Sections 6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Orders 1982 r/w Section 7(i) 9(ii) of EC Act 1955.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.