- (1.) The petitioner retired as Deputy Manager (Technical), from the U.P. State Warehousing Corporation, Regional Office, Jhansi (the Corporation) on 31 July 2010. As the Leave Encashment and Security Deposit amount was not paid to the petitioner after retirement, he filed Writ Petition No. 25770 of 2014 which was disposed of on 8 May 2014 with the following observations: "This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the non-payment of leave encashment and security deposit. The contention of the petitioner is that no disciplinary proceeding is pending against the petitioner and in fact he has retired and no proceeding has been initiated against him. Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 has very fairly conceded that no disciplinary proceeding is pending against him. Considering the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of Leave Encashment, Security deposit and other dues as may be admissible to him as per law and take final decision within 3 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith." The petitioner placed this judgment for compliance. An order dated 19 July 2014 was then passed instituting enquiry against the petitioner for financial loss caused to the Corporation from 2001-02 upto 2004-05. Consequently, the representation filed by the petitioner for payment of leave encashment amount and security amount was rejected an order dated 30 July 2014. These orders dated 19 July 2014 and 30 July 2014 have been assailed in this petition.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the provisions of Rule 351-A of the Civil Services Regulation are not applicable to the employees of the Corporation as they have not been adopted by the Corporation and there is no corresponding provision in the Regulations framed by the Corporation which permit institution of disciplinary proceedings after retirement. It is, therefore, his submission that the orders dated 19 July 2014 and the order dated 30 August 2014 should be set aside and a direction for making the payment should be issued. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the Division Bench judgment of the Luckhow Bench of this Court in Raj Kishore Dubey v. U.P. State Ware Housing Corp. Through Chairman Lko. and another, 2014 3 ADJ 75 (DB)(LB) and the subsequent judgment of the Division Bench in Wajahat Hussain Kazmi v. State of U.P. Thru its Prin. Secy. Food & Civil Supplies and others, Service Bench No. 73 of 2013, decided on 22 August 2014.
(3.) The Division Bench of this Court in Raj Kishore Dubey observed as follows: "15. Likewise in the case of Lal Babu v. State of U.P. and another, Writ A. No. 24752 of 2012 decided on 22.5.2012, the petitioner was employee of the same corporation and in the said case also after his retirement in the year 2010 the alleged loss caused by him and which was intended to be recovered by the Corporation. A Division Bench of this Court has observed as under: "In our opinion, after the retirement of the petitioner on 31.12.2010 he cannot be proceeded with or held liable for the alleged loss caused to the Corporation more than six years prior to his retirement. The respondents are thus not justified in withholding the amount of leave encashment, contributory provident fund and security." 17. Learned counsel for the Corporation was unable to point out any provision under the U.P. Warehousing Corporation Staff Regulation which empowers the Management to initiate the disciplinary proceeding after three years of the retirement. 18. For the reasons given here in above, the disciplinary proceeding in pursuance of the charge memo 26.4.2008, which relates to the petitioner is quashed. 19. Respondents are directed to pay the entire outstanding dues payable to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order." The Division Bench in Wajahat Hussain Kazmi followed the aforesaid Division Bench. Following the aforesaid Division Bench judgments, we quash the order dated 19 July 2014 and the consequential order dated 30 August 2014 passed by the Managing Director, U.P. State Warehousing Corporation New Hyderabad, Lucknow and direct that the respondents should pay the entire Leave Encashment and Security Deposit amount to the petitioner expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed by the petitioner. The petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.;