- (1.) The prayer made by the petitioner in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is for quashing order dated 13.11.2003 (P-3) effecting recovery of Rs. 2,93,285/- from his Death-cum- Retirement Gratuity, after his requirement.
(2.) The petitioner was appointed on the post of Lecturer by the Managing Committee, Guru Nanak Nav Bharat College, Narur Panchhat-respondent No. 3 on 24.7.1971 against an aided post. The aforementioned institution is affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar-respondent No. 4. The appointment of the petitioner was duly approved by respondent No. 1. On the basis of his excellent record, the petitioner was appointed as Principal on 1.11.1999 in the Guru Nanak Nav Bharat College, Narur Panchhat-respondent No. 2. His pay on the post of Principal was protected by order dated 21.6.2000 and he was allowed to serve as Principal at his basic pay of Rs. 16,200/- w.e.f. the date of his joining, which was 1.11.1999 (P-7). He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.1.2003. Consequently, he became entitled to all his retiral benefits including gratuity, which were not paid. In that regard, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 10.4.2003 (P-1). A show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 30.10.2003 alleging various irregularities (P-2). The aforementioned show-cause notice has never been received by the petitioner as he was in England from 26.6.2003 to 4.12.2003. However, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 passed the impugned dated 13.11.2003 (P-3) and thereby recovered a sum of Rs. 2,93,285/- out of the gratuity amount payable to him. Thereafter, the petitioner sent legal notice dated 6.7.2004 (P-4) requesting them to withdraw the order dated 13.11.2003 (P-3). The order dated 13.11.2003 (P-3), which is the subject matter of challenge in this petition reads as under :- "You worked as Lecturer in Punjabi from 24.7.1971 to 31.10.1999 in our College. The post of Principal was advertised and you applied in response to the same. You were selected and appointed as a Principal on probation for one year on 1.11.1999 in the pay scale Rs. 12000-18300. As you were fresh appointee, you were required to claim pay Basic Pay of Rs. 12,000/- but you fixed your basic pay at Rs. 14,940/-. Therefore, you have drawn excess amount of Rs. 2,23,285/- from 1.11.1999 to 28.1.2003. Besides this, this you purchased an old Photostat Machine as a new one at a cost of Rs. 76,200/- whereas the actual cost of the old machine was Rs. 26,200/-. This machine never functioned and all Photostat work was got done from the open market. Therefore, you misappropriated Rs. 50,000/- of the College. In addition to above, 65 Books of the College Library costing Rs. 20,000/- were with you. You neither returned the books nor reimbursed the price of books. Thus an amount of Rs. 20,000/- was payable by you on account of the cost of books. A show-cause notice No. PF/IS Wasu dated 30.10.2003 was given to you under registered A.D. Post as well as under certificate posting. While the Regd. A.D. notice has been received back undelivered, but the notice sent under certificate posting has not been received back and the same is deemed to have delivered to you. You were called upon to show-cause within 10 days as to why the aforesaid amount be not recovered from you by adjusting the same from your gratuity. However, no reply has been received. Now the matter has been considered by the Managing Committee of the College in its meeting held on 12.11.2003 and because of reasons given above, it has been decided to make a recovery of Rs. 2,93,285/-. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 2,93,285/- has been adjusted out of the gratuity payable to you. Consequently a cheque of balance amount of Rs. 35,563/- No. CD0742525 dated 14.11.2003 is enclosed herewith."
(3.) Mr. Rajinder Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner, has argued that the impugned order suffers from patent illegality, inasmuch as, the petitioner was never considered as a fresh appointee nor he was given the basic pay of Rs. 12,000/- as suggested by the impugned order. He has drawn our attention to resolution dated 21.6.2000 (P-7), passed by the Managing Committee, Guru Nanak Nav Bharat College, Narur Panchhat-respondent No. 3, which shows that the pay of the petitioner as Lecturer was protected because at the time of his selection as Principal he was already serving as Lecturer at the basic pay of Rs. 16,200/-, which fact was duly verified by the DPI (Punjab), Chandigarh. Therefore, he was allowed to serve as Principal at his basic pay of Rs. 16,200/- w.e.f. the date of his joining which was 1.11.1999. Mr. Goyal has further argued that no recovery in any case could be effected after the retirement of the petitioner as is sought to be made from him by the impugned order. He has referred to the allegation of purchase of an old photostat machine, which is alleged to have been purchased at the rate of new machine. It has been alleged that the machine had never functioned and the photostat work was got done from the open market. On the aforesaid basis, it has been considered as proved that Rs. 50,000/- has been misappropriated by the petitioner. Learned counsel has also pointed out that the cost of 65 books is also sought to be recovered from the petitioner which has been determined at Rs. 20,000/-.;