Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

M/S Sandeep Phenyol vs State Secretary And Ors on 21 March, 2023

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2023/RJJD/006918]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6920/2011

M/s Sandeep Phenyol

----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan & Ors.

                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Proprietor of
                                M/s Sandeep Phenyol, Present in
                                person
For Respondent(s)         :             -



      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

                                 Judgment

Reserved on 17/03/2023

Pronounced on 21/03/2023

1. The lawyers are abstaining from the work due to strike.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is therefore, humbly prayed that:-

(a) The writ petition may kindly be allowed and;

(b) An appropriate writ, direction or order may be issued against the respondents quashing the order for re-inquiry issued by respondent no.4 on the application dated 24.5.2011 vide annexure-21 and also quashing the order passed by Additional District Collector dated 7.6.2011 vide annexure-22.

(c) That an appropriate writ, direction or order may be issued against the respondents quashing the order dated 27.6.2011 vide annexure-23 whereby the payment of the work done by the petitioner has been ordered to be stayed.

(d) An appropriate writ, direction or order may be issued against the respondents holding that inquiry ordered by the District Collector and Additional District Collector are void ab initio and without jurisdiction and consequent action taken thereon are also void.

[2023/RJJD/006918] (2 of 8) [CW-6920/2011]

(e) That without prejudice to the above relief an appropriate writ, direction and order may be issued against the respondents not to use the order of re-inquiry as a tool to stop payment and discontinue supply of phenyl/cleaner having been made or to be made by the petitioner.

(f) that an appropriate writ direction may be issued for recompensating the petitioner with payment of outstanding dues of the petitioner with payment of outstanding dues of the petitioner with 18% interest since the execution of work upto the full payment thereof

(g) Cost of litigation may be awarded to the petitioner.

(h) Any other relief which this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper may also be granted in favour of the petitioners."

3. As the pleaded facts and the record would reveal, the

petitioner's (Proprietor of M/s. Sandeep Phenyol) Unit is registered

as a Micro Unit with the District Industry Centre, Sri Ganganagar.

The petitioner is a manufacturer and supplier of phenyol/cleaner

with the brand, namely, 'Osmic'; the trademark for the same was

issued by the Government of India vide TM No. of 2043353.

3.1 The Deputy District Education Officer, Sadulsahar issued an

order on 01.03.2011, whereby it was required that the Firm

supplying phenyol/cleaner to various schools run by the Education

Department ought to be in possession of 10 requisite certificates,

as mentioned in the said order. As per the petitioner, the

petitioner-Firm fulfilled all such requirements.

3.1.1 The Block Elementary Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti,

Suratgarh, vide letter dated 01.02.2011 and the Block Elementary

Education Officer, Padampur vide letter dated 21.02.2011,

directed all the Head Masters of Elementary and Middle Schools to

purchase phenyol/cleaner from a Firm registerd with District

[2023/RJJD/006918] (3 of 8) [CW-6920/2011]

Industries Officer having trademark and income tax certificate,

pollution certificate & measurement certificate from the Industries

Department; and other requisite certificates/documents from the

competent authorities. As per the petitioner, the petitioner-Firm

also fulfilled all such requirements.

3.2 Subsequently, on 21.03.2011, the Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh

(Shekhawat), Sri Ganganagar lodged a complaint against the

petitioner before the District Collector, Sri Ganganagar, on the

basis of a news article published in the daily newspaper "Sandhya

Border Times". Upon the said complaint, the Additional District

Collector, Sri Ganganagar ordered an enquiry to be conducted by

the District Education Officer (Elementary Education), Sri

Ganganagar and directed the District Education Officer to conduct

proceedings as per the note appended to such complaint and

submit a report; whereupon the District Education Officer

constituted a two-Member Committee, which gave opportunity of

being heard to all concerned. The Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh

(Shekhawat) also placed its grievances and documents on record.

Thereafter, a questionnaire was framed, and such questionnaire

was exhaustive in nature, covering all aspects of the enquiry on

the issue raised in the complaint.

3.2.1 As per the petitioner, it is clear from the aforementioned

complaint dated 21.03.2011 that the same was made on the basis

of the news article published in the aforementioned daily

newspaper, and thus, the initiation of the enquiry was also based

on the said news article, which was to the effect that a particular

Firm (petitioner-Firm) is pressurizing schools to buy phenyol from

[2023/RJJD/006918] (4 of 8) [CW-6920/2011]

it and charging exorbitant rates for its product and the Block

Education Officers are in cahoots with the Firm. The statements of

Block Elementary Education Officers, Sadulsahar, Padampur,

Raisinghnagar & Suratgarh were in favour of the petitioner.

Afterwards the enquiry was concluded and report was submitted

with no charges proved against the petitioner.

3.3 However, on 16.05.2011, respondent No.8-District Secretary,

Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh (Shekhawat) filed a complaint before

the District Collector. On 07.06.2011, an order was passed by the

Additional District Collector, Sriganganagar, directing the District

Supplier Officer, Sriganganagar to conduct inquiry into the said

complaint. As per the petitioner, the District Supply Officer has

not made any inquiry from the petitioner and he has not served

with any notice in that regard.

3.3.1 Vide order dated 27.06.2011, the District Education Officer

(Elementary Education), Sriganganagar, on the basis of the order

of the District Collector, directed all the Block Elementary Officers

to stop the payment to the petitioner-Firm. The petitioner's Unit is

a small cottage industry, and aggrieved by the impugned action of

the respondents, the present petition has been preferred before

this Hon'ble Court, claiming the aforequoted reliefs.

4. Mr. Sandeep Sharma (Proprietor of the petitioner-Firm)

present in person submitted that the Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh

(Shekhawat), Sri Ganganagar lodged the complaint before the

respondent-authorities, and on basis of the said complaint, the

Additional District Collector, Sri Ganganagar ordered an enquiry to

be conducted by the District Education Officer (Elementary

[2023/RJJD/006918] (5 of 8) [CW-6920/2011]

Education), Sri Ganganagar. However no charges were proved

against the petitioner upon conclusion of the enquiry.

4.1 He further submitted that the Rajasthan Shikshak Sangh

(Shekhawat) is pressurizing the authorities concerned to conduct

re-enquiry in the matter, and thus, the role of the Rajasthan

Shikshak Sangh (Shekhawat) in the matter is suffers from mala

fide. Even after the inquiry report, the Additional District Collector

was pressurized to conduct the re-inquiry and that the same is

without any substance, arbitrary and illegal.

4.1.1 He also submitted that the Additional District Collector,

Sriganganagar vide order dated 07.06.2011 ordered the District

Supply Officer, Sriganganagar to do a re-inquiry into the matter.

Afterwards by an order dated 27.06.2011, the District Education

Officer directed all the Block Elementary Officers to stop the

payment to the petitioner-Firm, depriving the petitioner of the

means of livelihood.

4.2 As per the petitioner, the petitioner is being deprived of

business of supplying phenyol/cleaner despite fulfilling all

requirements of a small scale cottage industries. According to the

Account Rules as far as the purchases upto Rs.3000/- are

concerned, no tender is required and value of phenyol/cleaner

supplied by the petitioner was upto Rs.1470/-.

4.2.1 The phenyol/cleaner was supplied in 20L pack in each of the

school, and the amount charged for 20L phenyol/cleaner was

Rs.1470/- (including value added tax @ 5%). The phenyol/cleaner

supplied by the petitioner was sent through private vehicle (PICK

UP, bearing registration No.RJ-13 G 3710), driven by one Rajesh

[2023/RJJD/006918] (6 of 8) [CW-6920/2011]

Kumar, which is used for publicity and supply only, and has no

connection with the nutritious diet supply. Moreover, as per the

petitioner, it was also found during the earlier enquiry that no

concrete evidence was available regarding supply of

phenyol/cleaner alongwith the nutritional items; the role of the

respondent No.9-Sangh in the nutrition programme is also not

above board.

4.3 It is submitted that the impugned orders of re-inquiry are

manifestly arbitrary and illegal and the stoppage of payment

requires to be compensated with interest @ 18% p.a. payable to

the petitioner.

5. Heard the petitioner (Proprietor of the Firm) present in

person as well as perused the record of the case.

6. This Court finds that the petitioner-Firm is a supplier of

phenyol/cleaner to schools run by the Education Department of

the State. The Block Elementary Education Officer, Panchayat

Samiti Suratgarh and Block Elementary Education Officer,

Padampur vide orders dated 01.02.2011 and 21.02.2011

respectively, directed the Head Masters of Elementary and Middle

Schools to purchase phenyol/clearner from Firm registered with

District Industries Officer and having trade mark, income tax

certificate, pollution certificate and other relevant and requisite

certificates/documents, which, as per the record, were duly

complied with and fulfilled by the petitioner.

7. This Court further finds that the respondent-Rajasthan

Shikshak Sangh (Shekhawat) filed the complaint against the

petitioner-Firm and the same was enquired into, and during such

[2023/RJJD/006918] (7 of 8) [CW-6920/2011]

enquiry, the issues were framed by the authority concerned, and

after making due deliberations, the authority has drawn the

conclusion in the enquiry report (Annexure-20), in favour of the

petitioner, as follows:

"fu'd'kZ :-

nksuksa i{kksa ds c;ku] izLrqr lk{;ksa ,oa xokgksa ds c;kuksa dk xBu v/;;u] voyksdu ,oa euu djus ij tkap lfefr bl fu'd'kZ ij igqaph gS fd eS0 lanhi Qsfu;ksy ineiqj jksM Jhxaxkuxj jktLFkku ljdkj ftyk m|ksx dsUnz Jhxaxkuxj }kjkk iathd`r QeZ gS A ifjoknh }kjk ,slk dksbZ lk{; izek.k izLrqwr ugha fd;k x;k gS ftlesa ifjokn esa mYysf[kr vkjksi izekf.kr gks jgs gksa A"

7.1 Thus, the concerned enquiry authority has concluded that

the petitioner-Firm is a registered Firm, as required, and that the

allegations as levelled in the complaint have not been proved

against the petitioner-Firm, as no concrete evidence has been

placed on record before the authority to prove such allegations.

Furthermore, this Court finds from the deliberations made by the

enquiry authority in the enquiry report (Annexure-20), that the

authority has also taken into due consideration the fact that the

allegations in the complaint are of a very serious nature, as the

same pertains to the health and hygiene of the young children

studying in the schools of the State.

8. This Court finds that though the Education Department is