WRIT PETITION 1401 of 2007 on 20 December 1998

1. Navneet S/o Sumantrao Bhanap,Age : 48 Years, Occu. : Service,(Depot Manager),R/o S. T. Colony, Samarth Nagar,Aurangabad.

2. Suresh S/o Santram Gaikwad,Age : 43 Years, Occu. : Service,(Asst. Works Supervisor),R/o 32, Raje Sambhaji Colony,Jadhavwadi, Aurangabad.

3. Shivaji S/o Laxmanrao Shinde,Age : 56 Years, Occu. : Service,R/o 4/3/45, Moti Karanja,Aurangabad.

4. Sameer S/o Mohanrao Terdalkar,Age : 42 Years, Occu. : Service,R/o Flat No. 20, Vinaya Apartment,Mitranagar, Aurangabad.

5. Mohan S/o Dagdu Rathod,Age : 49 Years, Occu. : Service as clerk,R/o Plot No. 51/2, Vijaynagar,Garkheda, Aurangabad.

.. Applicants

Versus

1. The State of Maharashtra.

2. Pandurang S/o Shamgir Giri,Age : 58 Years, Occu. : Service,Age : 58 Years, Occu. : Service,

(Sr. Security and Vigilence Officer)R/o New S. T. Colony, Thakrey Nagar,N-2, CIDCO, Aurangabad

.. Respondents

Shri S. K. Barlota, Advocate for Applicants.Shri R. B. Bagal, A.P.P. for the Respondent No. 1.Shri D. S. Bagul, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALAV. K. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : 18TH DECEMBER, 2015.

ORAL JUDGMENT(Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) :- .Mr. Barlota, the learned counsel submits that, the complaint is filed against the present applicants and others for the offences punishable U/Sec. 420, 468, 471, 409 r/w Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that behind every five liters diesel, 30 ml of diesel was dispensed less from the dispensing pump. The applicants are the employees of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. The learned counsel submits that, the said action is improper. The M.S.R.T.C. had subsequently constituted an Enquiry Committee consisting of Senior Security and Vigilance Officer, the Finance and Accounts officer, so also the Divisional Store Officer. They have conducted the detailed enquiry and have submitted the report stating that the allegations of dispensing 30 ml diesel less in five litters are incorrect. The stock in the under ground tank is proper. In case if 30 ml diesel was dispensed less in every five liters, there should be difference in the under ground stock which does not

appear. It is further stated that, difference would be of 0.006%, which is within the permissible limit as per the Government Gazette dated 20th December, 1998. The learned counsel requests to quash the said charge sheet against the applicants.

2. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that, the complaint was directed to be lodged at the behest of the Managing Director of the M. S. R. T. C. Subsequently an enquiry came to be conducted and upon perusing the enquiry report it was found that no offence is committed and had requested State to withdraw the first information report. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 placed on record the said letter.

3. The learned A. P. P. submits that, the investigation is made and thereafter rightly charge sheet is submitted.

4. We have considered the submissions. The complaint is lodged only on the ground that from the dispensing pump every time when five liters of diesel was being dispensed, 30 ml was dispensed less. It is submitted that, the same is within the permissible limits as per the Government Gazette dated 20th December, 1998 as referred in the report of the committee appointed by the M. S. R. T. C. itself. It has also been observed in the report that, considering the supply of diesel, condition of dispensing pump and stock in under ground tank, there is no difference indicating that there was short supply of 30 ml diesel

5. In the report even the details are given as to why there does not appear to be short supply. The officer from the Weights and Measures Department had inspected the same on 07.11.2006, the short delivery was reported by the officer concerned on 28.10.2006. The total supply of diesel from the period 28.10.2006 to 07.11.2006 was considered. Considering the said supply of the stock, that there is no difference found and in any case the difference would not be more than 0.006%. Difference upto 0.25% is permissible as per the said report. Even the M.S.R.T.C. on receipt of the said report has communicated the State for withdrawal of the F.I.R.

6. Considering the above, the charge sheet in proceedings bearing R.C.C. No. 720 of 2012 pending with the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad to the extent of present applicants is quashed and set aside. The criminal writ petition accordingly disposed of. No costs.

Sd/-Sd/-

[ V. K. JADHAV, J. ]

[ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

bsb/Dec. 15