Allahabad High Court
Rajendra Pal vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy ... on 29 March, 2023
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 22
(1)Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20617 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rajendra Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Cooperative And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ratnesh Singh Tomar,Surya Prakash
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary
(2)Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21045 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rajendra Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ratnesh Singh Tomar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary
AND
(3)Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21046 of 2018
Petitioner :- Rajendra Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ratnesh Singh Tomar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Since the aforesaid petitions pertain to same cause of action, they are being heard together and decided.
Writ A No.20617 of 2018 has been filed against the order dated 28.01.2016 directing recovery of an amount of Rs.1,29,307.55/- from service benefits of petitioner.
Writ A No.21045 of 2018 has been filed against order dated 28.01.2016 imposing a penalty of recovery of Rs.18099.42/- from service benefits of petitioner.
While Writ A No.21046 of 2018 pertains to challenge to order dated 06.01.2016 directing recovery of Rs.28926.40/- from service benefits of petitioner.
Heard Mr. Surya Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered with the judgment and order dated 30.03.2018 passed by this Court in bunch of writ petitions reported in [2018 (36) LCD 1308]; Hinch Lal vs. State of U.P. & others.
Sri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 has not disputed the legal position of the issue in question.
The aforesaid judgment pertains to orders passed by the competent authority of the U.P. State Ware Housing Corporation whereby the petitioners therein were dismissed from service and orders for recovery against them with respect of shortage, loss/ shrinkage in rice stored by Food and Civil Supply Department as well as the Food Corporation of India had been assailed. In the bunch of petitions decided by the aforesaid judgment, orders pertained to recovery had been issued and were also decided along with other petitions pertaining to dismissal. The aforesaid petitions had been allowed primarily on the ground of non-adherence to principles of natural justice. The aforesaid questions also is to be decided in the present petitions and therefore in the considered opinion of this Court, the aforesaid judgment is squarely applicable in the present facts and circumstances.
Therefore, this writ petition is also decided finally in terms of the judgment and order dated 30.03.2018 passed by this Court in the case of Hinch Lal (supra), thereby the order dated 07.01.2016 passed by the opposite party No.3, as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, is quashed.
Petitioner in the present petitions shall also be entitled to the benefit granted by this Court in the aforesaid case of Hinch Lal (supra)
Consequences to follow.
Order Date :- 29.3.2023
Subodh/-
