Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14054 of 2019 Petitioner :- N.S. Mathur Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks for quashing of the notice dated 7.1.2019 issued by the Chief Finance and Accounts Officer, U.P. State Tourism Corporation Ltd., the third respondent herein and further to issue a mandamus commanding the respondents to release his retiral dues such as gratuity, leave encashment etc.
In the writ petition, the petitioner states that he was superannuated on 31.3.2017 from the post of Superintending Accountant. During his service, there has been no complaint of any sort against the petitioner. All of a sudden, a notice dated 12th September, 2017 was issued from the office of the Managing Director, U.P. State Tourism Corporation Ltd. On account of some audit objections, after issuance of the said notice, under the threat of F.I.R. and coversion, the petitioner had given an undertaking on 19.9.2017 that he was ready to deposit the amount of Rs. 1,27,852/- which was wrongly not deposited in the accounts of the department.
Pursuant thereto, an order dated 24.10.2017 was passed for deduction of the amount of Rs. 1,27,852/- from the retiral dues of the petitioner.
All of a sudden on 26.4.2019, the petitioner had received a notice dated 7.1.2019, wherein he has been found guilty of embezzlement of Rs. 5,31,424/- on the basis of objection of Special Audit team. Reply to the said notice has been given on 8.5.2019. After superannuation of the petitioner, the respondent had paid provident fund amount but gratuity, leave encashment and other retiral dues remained unpaid.
A categorical statement has been made that there was no notice or allegations of misconduct against the petitioner and no departmental enquiry was ever instituted.
Having perused the notice dated 7.1.2019, by order dated 16.9.2019, this Court had asked the petitioner to bring on record the notice/order dated 12.09.2017, Letter No. 2067/Lekha- 6/2017 on record.
By means of the present amendment application filed today, the petitioner while giving the said document i.e. Letter No. 2067/Lekha-6/2017 dated 12th September, 2017 (pages 12-13) seeks to challenge the same by proposed amendment.
The contention is that the petitioner was having no knowledge about the said recovery, inasmuch as, the letter dated 12th September, 2017, as aforesaid, had never been served on the petitioner.
This submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is not acceptable for two reasons; firstly that nothing has been disclosed in the amendment application as to how the petitioner could lay his hands on the letter dated 12.09.2017, Letter No. 2067/Lekha-6/2017, which is now appended with the amendment application. Bald allegation that it was not served on him till filing of the writ petition, is not acceptable.
Moreover, the challenge is to the show cause notice dated 7.1.2019 which records the recovery proposed vide order dated 12.09.2017, Letter No. 2067/Lekha-6/2017.
The proposed amendment application is found misconceived and hence rejected.
It is open for the petitioner to submit his reply to the competent authority.
No interference is required in the present writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed as such.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Brijesh