kind attention: hon'ble cm haryana ch. bhupinder singh hooda - the national kvib employees...

7/30/2019 Kind attention: Hon'ble CM Haryana Ch. Bhupinder Singh Hooda - The National KVIB Employees Federation

1/6

Kind attention: Honble Ch. Bhupinder Singh Hooda, CM, Haryana,

Greetings,

The National KVIB Employees Federation requested to its Patron Ch. B.S. Hooda, now CM, Haryana to

look in to this matter because the Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Haryana, Department of

Industries handled the matter adopting biased and special tactics related to Naresh Kadyan, DKVIO

but presently placed under suspansion due to Honble CM, Haryana above said order of cancellation

of Naresh Kadyan posting from Faridabad.

To,

The Chief Executive,

Haryana Khadi and Village Industries Board,

Panchkula.

Subject: Charge sheet regarding.

Sir,

Kindly refer to the KVIB letter No. HRB/Admn/EA-1/12363 dated 24-2-2010, HRB/Rewari/Admn/54

dated 10-7-2012, HRB/RTI Act/3095 dated 23-8-2012,HRB/Admn/EA-1/9499 dated 25-3-2013 read

with the Govt. of Haryana, Chief Secretarys Office letter No. 48/1/2008/3-V11 dated 4-2-2013 along

with many other relevant refrences on the subject cited as above, Distt office Fbd/ Maketing/5 dated

11-4-2007 and objection raised vide letter dated 28-4-2013.

It is humbly submitted that undersigned have performed his duties in the interest of the Board

dedicatedly and honestly with the consent of then Chief Executive of the Board with out any

personnel gain and profit, in fact marketing was the commercial activity of the Board to earn revenue

as service charges @ 5% of the transections from the limited suppliers approved by the Board after

executing mutual understanding , agreement attached here with as A, there was no option to consult


2/6

the rates from the open market and there was no proper training was given to the undersigned to

handle the commercial work, it was additional duties and work was given to the officials of the Board,

where as no proper registration certificate has been issued by the Board to its so called registered

supplier throughout Haryana, principally all transactions were made during the marketing period

upperside from the open market rates because suppliers have to pay 5% service charges to the Board

and no commercial concern work as chariety, every body have constitutional rights to earn bread and

butter for self and their dependents. Till today undersigned have not yet received any objections from

the purchasing department about the sub standard materials supplied by the suppliers neither by the

head office, if any objections raised by the purchasing department then as per agreement as stated A

above it was the duty of the supplier to replace the articles, in fact as per reply given by the Board

under RTI Act, 2005 to the undersigned it was cleared that the Board doesnt approved the rates of

Chullah Bhathi, no action was required at the level of HO, agreemen copy supplied, HO did not

received any objections from the Consignee, HO received the marketing return vide letter No. 5 dated

11-4-2007 for the period 1-1-2007 to 31-3-2007 (which was found in order), purchasing department

had inspection committee and after inspection of this committee material was supplied by the

supplier, Board supplied those items which were approved under approved source scheme, it means if

any material supplied other than the approved list then the transaction can treat out of marketing but

in the interest of Board for generating extra revenue, Education department does not issued any

guidelines to the Board and this reply attached here with as B for ready refrences.

Hence there was no question arrise of sub standard material was supplied through the undersigned as

performing his official duties assigned by the Board, principally it was the duty of the purchasing

department to abide all the terms and conditions of their department and after receipt of proper

material payment should be made. For example some material was supplied to the DEO, Faridabad

through the supplier, payment was released by the DEO and after deducting 5% secvice charge rest

payment was released to the supplier but objections raised by the purchasing department afterrelease of payment to the supplier by the undersigned but after reciving the objections payment was

stopped to the supplier and after satisfaction of the purchasing department payment was released to

the supplier, all these 4 correspondences attached here with as C, if any objections received from the

DPEO, Gurgaon then definitely objections were removed after replacing the objectionable materials.

It would be pertinent to mention here that Board never deputed sufficient required field staff to the

undersigned to perform his official duties and undersigned always faced extra burden while

performing his official duties.

As per the Govt. of Haryana Chief Secretary office letter dated 4-2-2013 Shri M.K. Midha, IAS was

appointed as Inquiry officer for group A and B, where as undersigned does not fall under the A and Bcategory as defined by the Govt. of Haryana, hence above said Inquiry officer can not inquire the

baseless charges framed against the undersigned, hence under protest undersigned appearing before

the Inquiry officer, in fact undersigned is a duty bound while in service but when a IAS officer retired

from his Govt. service then he can not be treated as a public servant and he can not abide rules and

regulations framed for public servant because after retiremet he became general public and there

may be chance of adoption of mal practice by the Inquiry officer and he can oblidged their appointing


3/6

Authorities, natural justice might be ignored, hence you are humbly requested to change the Inquiry

officer as per rules and regulations.

It would be pertinent to mention here that undersigned is facing transefer and suspansion due to this

baseless chage sheet, where as Board have failed to abide the agreement, which was executed

between the Board and suppliers, May I ask to the Board that why supplier was not directed toreplace the objectionable material supplied in question and no apportunity was given to the

undersigned to explain his position before issuing charge sheet, which prove that special procedure is

being adopted in this particular matter with hidden agenda, where as baseless charges were framed

against the undersigned as transactions procedure was over on 27-2-2007 then how it could be

possible to comply with the HO instructions, which were issued on 16-11-2007 para 4 and 5 of the

charge sheet and this is enough sufficient evidence to prove that while preparing and issuing baseless

charge sheet no one has applied its healthy and sound mind, undersigned preparing its mind to

challenge this baseless charge sheet on the appropriate court of law for natural justice because this is

enough and undersigned feel torture and unnecessary harasment.

Reply of the charges:

1. There was no proper list was provided by the Board from which three quations were callednor sufficient subordinate staff was deputed, Can these three quations were being called from

the open market? As per past practice, which reflect in the Board agenda item No. 3 that

supply order be given to those suppliers who procure the supply orders from the purchasing

department and this is being reflected in the basic guidelines para lll Order procured and

prsented. Supply in question was properly done as per past practice, the material was

supplied by the supplier after satisfaction of the purchasing department and then payment

was released after reiving goods receipt, 5% service charges were deposited to the Board and

rest amount was released to the supplier, hence this charge is denied as baseless.

2. That the purchasing department approved rates as its own and asked the undersigned tosupply the material @ Rs. 3170/- each, where as these orders were being procured and

presented by the supplier, hence he was asked to execute the order as per agreement made

between Board and supplier, if there are any substandard material supplied by the supplier

then he is bound to replace the proper material, hence it is requested to please direct the

supplier to replace the objectionable materials in question. It would be pertinent to mention

here that the undersigned is not a duty bound to obey those instructions, which were issued

to the purchasing department officials by their senior officers, in fact undersigned is working

under the control of the Board, hence Board senior officers orders and directions can be

obeyed. May I ask question that when Board surveyed the cost of articles in question? It is

obserbed during the inquiry, when basic order copy was supplied to the undersigned that said

department asked to the purchasing officials to purchase gas chullah not gas chullah bhatti,

hence purchasing officials are responsible for any lapses and irregulaties, hence this cahrge is

denied and baseless.

3. All procedures were being adopted and nothing was concealed willingly and it is assumed thatwhen goods reciept was issued along with the payment by the purchasing department and


4/6

after deduction of 5% service charges rest payment was issued to the supplier by the

undersigned, hence this cahrge is denied and baseless.

4. This para is irrelevant, baseless and biased on the supply order in question, hence stronglydenied.

5. This para is irrelevant, baseless and biased on the supply order in question, hence stronglydenied.

6. This para is also baseless because proper intimation was given to the then Chief Executive ofthe Board and after proper consent on phone, supply order was executed, hence this charges

also denied and baseless. It was assumed that when Board accepted the marketing return

after proper examination at their level for the period of 1-1-2007 to 31-3-2007 and nothing

was conveyed to the undersigned, if any questions raised after a long period then it is a co-

responsibilty as per administrative principles and all channel officials are co responsible,

where as order was executed in the interest of Board for generation of revenue not for

personnel gain and profit, hence this charge denied and baseless.

May I ask one more question to the Board, please supply me the registration certificate issued by theHO after aceepting the agreement executed between Board and suppliers because as per my

knowlede, not a single certifate was issued officialy by the HO and undersigned placing mark of

interogation on all the work done during marketing by the Board and its all field functionaries, when

a matter became sujudice after lodging FIR then it will be in the interest of natural justice to try and

decide the matter by the competent court of law.

Hence you are humbly requested to drop all the baseless charges and give personnel hearing to the

undersigned to represent the matter along with evidences, in the interest of natural justice.

Sincerely yours,

Naresh Kadyan,

Technical Supervisor (Leather)

A copy is forwarded for information and necessary action to:

1. The Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Haryana, Chandigarh.2. The Chairman, Haryana Khadi and Village Industries Board, Panchkula.3.

Sh. M.K. Midha, IAS (Rtd), 999 / 15 part-2, Gurgaon.

Naresh Kadyan,

Secretary General, National Khadi and Village Industries Board Employees Federation,

(Apex body of All State KVIB Employees Unions), C-38, Rose Apartment, sector-14,

Prashant Vihar, Rohini, Delhi 110085.


5/6


6/6

kind attention: hon'ble cm haryana ch. bhupinder singh hooda - the national kvib employees...

Documents