Punjab-Haryana High Court
Siri Krishan vs Haryana State Small Industries & Export ... on 2 December, 2023
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153644
1532 2023:PHHC:153644
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-7272-2015
DECIDED ON: 02.12.2023
SIRI KRISHAN
.....PETITIONER
VERSUS
HARYANA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES & EXPORT CORPORATION
LTD AND ORS
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Naveen Daryal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG Haryana.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Articles 226/227
of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for
quashing the impugned order dated 02.02.2015 (Annexure P-13).
2. In view of para 9 of the affidavit dated 12.07.2019 submitted by Dr.
Yash Garg, Director Industries and Commerce Department, Haryana, wherein
specific declaration has been made to the effect that judgment & decree dated
13.11.2009 for recovery against M/s Goyal Enterprises was passed and admittedly,
respondent No.2 through respondent No.1 has already recovered the amount and
considering the financial position of the judgment debtor and to minimise the loss
of the Corporation as full and final settlement i.e., Rs.34,61,952/- against the actual
recoverable amount of Rs.86,72,815/-, since the order of punishment dated
03.03.2005 (Annexure R-2) is only inflicting the punishment for recovery of
amount to the tune of Rs.28,62,011/-, holding the petitioner responsible for the same
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153644
loss and to make good for the same by depositing the amount, as ordered in the
order of punishment is totally unwarranted, which would actually result into undue
financial advantage and benefit, if the amount is recovered twice on account of the
same loss.
3. Learned State counsel has also not disputed the said fact, though made
an attempt to defend the stand of the State urging that in fact the actual amount
recoverable came to be Rs.86,72,815/- after adding the interest till the date of actual
realization made by M/s Goyal Enterprises, in pursuance of the judgment and
decree dated 13.11.2009 for the said loss, petitioner needs to be punished for mis-
conduct and negligence.
5. However, a perusal of the order dated 02.02.2015 (Annexure P-13
makes it ample clear and leaves no doubt in the mind of this Court that there is no
order of any nature inflicting punishment on account of mis-conduct or negligence,
except to make good for loss, which was suffered by the respondent-Corporation
by effecting recovery of the same amount, which already stands paid by M/s Goyal
Enterprises and in the light of the same, the order dated 02.02.2015 (Annexure P-
13) is absolutely arbitrary and illegal as well as violative of the principles of natural
justice and, therefore, not sustainable. Hence the same is ordered to be quashed.
6. The amount so deducted shall be released within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
7. The petition is therefore, allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
02.12.2023 JUDGE
Meenu
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:153644
2 of 2
