TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) THE Petitioner challenges the Charge -sheet dated 28.12.2006, the Enquiry Report dated 14.1.2008 the Order of punishment dated 18.6.2008 and questions the non -disposal of his Appeal that he had filed on 11.8.2008 (Annexure - P/15). The Petitioner has also prayed for a direction upon the Respondents to pay all retirement benefits including pension together with statutory interest.
(2.) ACCORDING to the Petitioner, he joined the Food Corporation of India in 1973 as Assistant - Grade III (D, and was finally promoted to the post of a Manager (Depot). After serving more than 34 years, he retired on 31.1.2008. According to the further case of Petitioner, he joined as Manager (Depot) at Gopalpur in November 2000 but prior to his joining, a C.B.I. Enquiry was under process against the Officer/Staff of Gopalpur Depot District Office, Durgapur for defalcation of F.C.I. stocks and stores. Consequently, 10 employees were either removed from service or transferred to other places. These employees had left the Depot without handing over charge and it was tinder these state of affairs that the Petitioner had joined and he was neither handed over charge of the Depot nor was he intimated about the "operational hazards" of the said Gopalpur Depot.
(3.) THE Petitioner has, in various paragraphs, stated, for his defence, his activities, his conduct and responsibilities while at Gopalpur. These are stated between paragraphs 3 to 11 and they are quoted below: "3. Your petitioner states that in addition to the duty of the Manager (Depot), he was also to take responsibility of Manager (Movement) in the depot and railway siding along with duty of Chief Labour Inspector for the labour force of about 350 heads working there. Therefore, he had to run from various corner of the depot and railway siding for efficient and effective performance of the depot work, movement work at railway siding Asansol and settlement of day to day problems of the workers. 4. Your petitioner states that the capacity of the Gopalpur Depot was 37800 Mts. Whereas to save demurrages, more than 40,000/ - Mts. Stocks of food grains -wheat and rice were accommodated there. In addition to that, there were various commodities of food grains stored there viz. Wheat (red), wheat (whiter, rice (boiled), rice (raw) and issuable and non - issuable food grains including gunnies and dead stock articles, which also had covered a very good position of capacity. Moreover, one stack space about 100 Mts. was utilised as shed/godown/sector office for conducting the operational work in every depot/sheds. Therefore, to accommodate the new arrivals of the food grain, the food grain bags were dumped at the alleyways/gangways gangways and thus, the individual identity of the bags and its contents were not assessable. Another serious problem was noticed there was that all sheds/godowns were having only one door, floors were not damp - proof and there were no scopes of cross ventilation in those sheds/godowns. In short, the A.R.D.C., Gopalpur a storage unworthy godown where stocks of food grains should not be stored for more than 3/4 months. But due to non -availability of movement programme and deteriorated condition of wheat and rice, the depot was hound to keep the stocks for years together, for which the stocks were further deteriorated to a greater extent and for the same, respondent authorities were responsible. In addition to the storage unworthyness of the godown and also due jampacked condition of the depot along with non - posting of quality control staff there. the curative measures of the food grains of the godowns could not be undertaken properly and effectively, as a result, the wheat and rice stocks were deteriorated to a great extent and some of the stocks were turned into Category 'A' to Category 'C' -'D' (partly damaged). That District Manager/Area Manager, Durgapur was also intimated about the alarming condition of the stocks of the depot by the petitioner in due time as soon as he joined there. The District Manager (Durgapur) also had intimated the same to the Senior Regional Manager/General Manager. A xerox copy of the D.O. letter issued by the Senior Regional Manager (W.B.) to District Manager, Durgapur, is annexed herewith and marked hereto with the letter 'P -2'. 5. Your petitioner states that due to abovesaid deplorable condition of the godown/depot, prior to his arrival there and also for the release of punished/transferred staff from the depot without handing over the charge of the godown/shed/sector, the storage losses, which had taken place prior to arrival of your petitioner there, could not be brought into limelight and all those losses (for which C.B.I. enquiry had been conducted and a good number of employees were punished/transferred) were detected subsequently when the godown/sheds were physically verified by way of issuing/shifting the stocks to other sheds/depot for the purpose of dehiring the depot of Gopalpur. Thus, it was crystal clear that the alleged losses/shortages of both bags/weight had taken place prior to arrival of your petitioner at Gopalpur Depot, when the depot was running in a pellmell condition but unfortunately due to negligence and careless attitude of the higher -ups coupled with giving shelter/coverage of the past deeds, the entire responsibility was thrown upon the shoulder of your petitioner who was working day and night in three capacities of Manager (Depot). Manager (Movement) and C.L.I. and therefore, for the alleged losses, neither your petitioner was responsible nor any negligence on his part could be levelled upon him as the alleged storage loss had been taken place/occurred prior to his arrival at Gopal Depot. 6. Your petitioner states that as per job specification of the corporation. Manager (Depot) is not the custodian of stocks. AG -I (depot) is the custodian of the stocks/shed incharge and for any omission/commission of stocks of food grains in the shed/godown/sector, Shed Incharges are personally responsible and answerable to the authority. But even knowing such position of job specification, the respondent authorities had thrown all responsibilities upon him wrongly, illegally and arbitrarily in violation of their own rule/job specification and therefore, the same is not tenable in the eye of law. A xerox copy of each of the job specification of Manager (Depot)/AM(D) and AG -I (D) are annexed herewith and marked hereto jointly with the letter 'P -3'. 7. Your petitioner states that the concerned Sector/shed/godown incharges, who were compelled by the then authorities to take over the charges of the sheds/sectors/godowns of Gopalpur on the basis of hook balance only after departure of the punished/transferred employees, were also punished for high percentage of storage losses in their sheds as the earlier losses could not be identified due to non -conducting of 100% weighment of the stocks stored there. The entire episode was taken place due to ill, wrong and arbitrary direction of the respondent authorities to cover up some fishy affairs of the depot which occurred prior to joining of your petitioner at Gopalpur Depot. The petitioner was treated as a scapegoat and thereby he was made a victim for the misdeeds of the respondent authorities for which your petitioner was in no way responsible. 8. Your petitioner states that as per Corporation's rules, quality control officials are personally responsible for the storage losses in the godowns/sheds. They are answerable for proper maintenance of the stocks. As far as the quality control staff are concerned, they are responsible not merely for advice but for planning and implementing of the necessary steps for keeping the stocks in sound condition. In the instant case, the stocks of food grains of rice and wheat had been deteriorated to a great extent and the condition of the grains was down graded, heavy infestation was noticed including the attack of Khapra and deterioration means loss of weight and therefore, deterioration of food grains was one of the prime reason for the alleged storage losses. Xerox copies of the instruction of the Corporation authorities and the acceptance of the respondent authorities dated 2.2.2001 are annexed herewith and marked hereto jointly with the letter 'P -4'. 9. Your petitioner states that in F.C.I., charge sheets are issued purely based upon book figures of storage losses, representing the differences between the receipt weight and delivery weight. Period of storage, down gradation of stocks, storage unworthyness of the godown driage of moisture contents and handing losses are never taken into account which is wrong, illegal and does not represent the actual losses in storage in F.C.I. Depot/godowns. The losses are also never be quantified by the authority concerned. In view of the above position, the Managing Director of the Corporation had instructed all concerned to investigate as to the cause of such loss and consequential responsibility of the delinquent officials. Such charges can be kept pending and should be processed further after due investigation if the case exists. In the instant case also no investigation was conducted as to the reasons of the alleged storage losses and the quantum of loss was assessed/found out on the basis of quantity receipt minus quantity issued and therefore, the same figure could not in any way represent the actual storage losses position of the Gopalpur Depot and therefore, the charge sheet prepared on the above -said basis was void ab initio. A xerox copy of the said D.O. letter dated 28.11.1996 is annexed herewith and marked hereto with the letter 'P -5'. 10. Your petitioner states that the moisture contents had played a vital role in contributing losses in storage at Gopalpur Depot. The Admitted position was that the differences of 1% moisture contents between receipt and delivery of food grains might contribute storage losses about 0.7%. In this case, this important and vital point was purposefully overlooked by the disciplinary authority while assessing the losses in storage. Thus, it was proved beyond doubt that without verifying and taking into account the various asepcts of the grounds/reasons of storage losses, the disciplinary authority in a casual manner and also to cover up the past misdeeds of the staff and officers of Gopalpur Depot including District Office, Durgapur, had flashed the quantity of storage losses by way of stock receipt minus stock delivered, which was totally wrong, irregular, illegal, unscientific and in violation of F.C.I.'s own instruction. Hence, the very calculation of the quantity of storage losses suffered from inherent defects and therefore, the alleged storage losses did not represent the actual picture of the depot and thus, the allegation of high percentage of storage loss as well as negligence in supervision stood incorrect. 11. Your petitioner states that it is scientifically proved that food grains of rice are an organic compound of botanic origin, origin, consisting of startch, protein, oil and water. These organic compounds are subject to earlier or later decomposition, depending upon mode of preservation and natural weather/environmental condition. Hence, the question of good preservation arises under a particular temperature in an air - tight container. It can be preserved for a longer period but it is very much difficult to preserve the food grains in the open godown in its original grade/condition more than one year. If the food grains are stored in the open godown, the peripheral layer of the grains deteriorates and turns into dust condition. Every biological product has natural destruction and loss of weight after a specified period and the food grains of rice and wheat is not exception to that. The percentage of weight loss increases with the deterioration of the stocks in question. In the instant case, the food grains of rice and wheat were stored in the storage unworthy godown of Gopalpur Depot in a jam -packed condition. The quality control treatment was not possible to undertake due to shortage of quality control staff, jam -packed condition of the godown, storage of food grains more than its capacity in the godowns, non -availability of cross -ventilation and failure of maintenance of 'FIFO' system due to one door system of the sheds. Moreover, the stocks of food grains were severely infested with Khapra and as such stocks of wheat issued for Bangladesh had been refused/returned back. Therefore, a very good quantity of food grains was severely downgraded which contributed a very good quantity towards storage losses at Gopalpur Depot, which was not accounted for. Hence, the figure of storage losses as shown by the respondent authorities was not the acurate one. "(Quoted) It appears that on 28.12.2006, a Charge -sheet was issued against the Petitioner. There were three Articles of Charges against him and they read as follows: "ARTICLE OF CHARGES FRAMED AGAINST SHRI RAMESWAR BISWAS, ASSTT. MANAGER (DEPOT) FORMERLY POSTED AT ARDC GOPALPUR UNDER THE DIST. MANAGER, F.C.I., DURGAPUR. Article : I Shri Rameswar Biswas, Asstt. Manager (Depot) while working as Depot Officer, A.R.D.C. Gopalpur under the Dist. Manager (Durgapur) had neglected to supervise the wheat stocks in the Sector -A, B and C of the Depot during the period from Jan. 2002 to July 2003, as a result of which the Depot sustained huge loss of the wheat stocks found on 100% weighment out of physical verification which were detected as short of Qtls. 36,64,14.280 amounting to Rs. 33,23,010.08 due to his supervisory lapse and lack of proper control on the performance of the shed In -charges of the sheds under the Sectors A, B and C, Shri Rameswar Biswas failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to his duties and acted in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Corporation contravening Regulation 31(a), (b), (c), 32, 32 -A (5)(9) and (30) of the F.C.I. Staff Regulations, 1971 as amended. Article : II. Shri Rameswar Biswas, Asstt. Manager (Depot) while working as Depot Officer. A.R.D.C. Gopalpur under the Dist. Manager (Durgapur) had neglected to supervise the Rice stocks in the Sector A,B & C of the Depot during the period June 31(a), (b), (c), 32, 32 -A (5)(9) and (30) of the F.C.I. Staff Regulations, 1971 as amended. Article : III Shri Rameswar Biswas, Asstt. Manager (Depot) while working as Depot Officer, A.R.D.C. Gopalpur under the Dist. Manager (Durgapur) had failed to supervise the weight of weigh Bridge where weight variations were detected on placement of empty/loaded truck from front side, middle side and back side. By his acts as aforesaid, Shri Rameswar Biswas failed to maintain absolute, integrity and devotion to his duties and acted in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Corporation contravening Regulations 31(a), (b), (c), 32, 32 -A (5)(9) and (30) of the F.C.I. Staff Regulations, 1971 as amended." (Quoted) ;