Welcome to All Participants

1
WelcometoAll Participants
2
EASTERN RAILWAYALL INDIA CONFERENCE OF
ISA/ASVS.

• Disposal of stock sheets and narrative reports
• Procedure followed in recovery, theft and claims
  cases.
• 1. In a recent Calcutta High Court judgement
  rejecting an appeal filed
• by the Railways (WPCT NO.695 of 2006 UOI Vs-
  Reba Basak ), it was
• observed as follows-
• It is settled proposition of law that
  any order which causes civil
• consequences can only be passed by the
  employer after observing
• the rules of natural justice. To fasten
  liability of Rs.27,15,926/- on
• the deceased without complying with the
  Rules of natural justice
• would certainly cause civil consequences
  to the widow of the
• deceased . The amount not having been
  determined in accordance
• with law, no recovery can be made from the
  gratuity.

3

• Therefore, we find no merit in this writ
  application and the same is dismissed
  accordingly.
• 2. The case arose in the matter of 4
  outstanding stock sheets raised against stock
  holder. 3 No. of stock sheets related to routine
  verification of 1997-98 and 1 no. stock sheet
  related to a special verification of 1998-99.
  The stock holder had died in harness within a
  year of raising the special verification stock
  sheet. Against the 1997-98 stock sheets the
  stock holder had not responded to the Accounts
  Rejoinder, while against the special verification
  stock sheet, he had not submitted any initial
  reply but had prayed for inspection of the field
  Book prior to submission of his reply. This is
  how the matter rested at the stage of his
  untimely death.

4

• 3. As per the Rly. Services Pension Rules, 1993
  (Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 98 read with sub-rule
  4(i)(a) and 4(ii) of Rule (15), which provides
  that it is permissible to make recovery of
  Government dues, even without obtaining the
  consent of the members of the family of the
  deceased Railway Servant, only the DCRG was
  withheld from the payment to the widow of the
  deceased. Against this decision, the aggrieved
  widow had filed a petition before the Central
  Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta, which has
  ruled in her favour.
• 4. Currently the matter is under consideration of
  the Railway Board for filing SLP before the
  Honble Supreme Court, having been recommended
  both by the Competent Authority of this Railway,
  as well as the Senior Government counsel, who
  had led the appeal.

5

• 5. Since we are having an All India Meet the
  above matter is being placed for discussion and
  debate as to whether the Indian Railways Stores
  Code provisions at Chapters 32 and 33 need
  amplification and /or modification to meet the
  test of legal scrutiny, that the provisions
  thereof fulfills all the requirements of natural
  justice. Or, whether prior to effecting
  recoveries, charge sheet as required under the
  DA Rules 1968, should be made mandatory in the
  case of serving Railway Stockholders.
• 6. It would not be digressing, if I were to
  state that the Indian Railway Stores Code (1993
  Edition) does in fact need a revision. If we are
  to look at para -3262S, there is a Note thereto,
  which reads see the note under Rule 3255 (d).
  If we are to refer to 3255-S , it would be seen
  to have been captioned deleted .Then the legal
  question which arises, is whether the note to
  3262-S is still in force or stands superseded, or
  is it that 3255-S is still in force

6

• This leads me to point out that unlike in other
  codes, say the Engineering Code or the Accounts
  Code or the Finance Code, where you will find a
  Concordance List as an Annexure to the code,
  detailing the paragraphs in the current code
  vis-à-vis the associated paragraphs in the
  earlier reprint and quoting the Rly. Boards
  authority letter no of new introduction/modificati
  on/redrafting /deletion. But in the Stores Code
  appendix, there is nothing of the sort appearing.
  
• 7. Coming back to the main issue, that is ,
  whether Chapter 32 and 33 provides for all facets
  of natural justice and reasonable opportunity of
  self defence to the stock holder and if not, in
  what way revision is required to make Chapter 32
  and 33 sufficiently comprehensive to meet the
  test of legal scrutiny.

7

• 8. What does the code presently have ?
• 8.1 Chapter 32 deals with stock verification of
  stores at Stores Depots and also details the
  procedure for disposal of stock sheets and
  Chapter 33 deals with Stock Verification of
  Stores on line.
• 8.2 As per the requirement of Para 3249 read
  with Para 3250(a) S , reasonable opportunity is
  afforded to the stock holder because (1) he
  participates in the stock taking, (2) it is
  compulsory for his acceptance of the result of
  verification, as recorded in the field book, and
  (3) his personal certifications, that all Stores
  pertaining to his charge have been shown to the
  stock verifier for stock verification, is
  required to be recorded in the field book before
  the stock verification work can be said to be
  complete .

8

• 8.3 Reasonable opportunity is also available
  at 3256-S read with 3258 (viii)-S as the stock
  sheet summarizing the items verified and
  reflecting the actual ground balance, the book
  balance and the arising discrepancies between
  the ground and the book, if any, is required to
  be signed by the stock holder in acceptance of
  the result.
• 8.4 Para 3259-S also gives an opportunity to
  the stock holder to be provided with adjustment
  or supplementary stock sheets to cover
  situations, where after completion of
  verification , materials are found, which did not
  come under the purview of the earlier
  stocktaking and are subsequently allowed to be
  remedied .
• 8.5 Reasonable opportunity is also available
  to the stock holder under Para 3262-S read with
  3266-S to explain and further explain the cause
  of the discrepancies before final decision is
  taken towards disposal of the stock sheets.

9

• 8.6 Para -3263(iv) provides for recovery of
  the cost of missing articles from the stock
  holder/parties at fault where the cause of the
  recovery is held to be due to negligence.
• 8.7 Para 3312-S instructs similar procedures
  in the disposal of stock sheets as in chapter
  32.
• 9. What does not the code presently have ?
• 9.1. Neither the code nor the GMs
  schedule of power indicates the delegated
  authority to issue orders for effecting the
  recovery, although Para 3263(iv)(e) provides for
  recording the authority.
• 9.1.1 Remedial Measures
• Therefore, the authority to decide recovery
  must be specified and prior to recovery
  requirement of issue of a notice is to be
  provided for.

10

• 9.2.1 Remedial Measure
• A Sub-Rule must be incorporated to this effect.
  
• 9.3 Chapter 33 does not provide for the
  procedure of verification of stock of electrical
  signaling telecommunication and medical deptt.
  stockholders .
• 9.3.1 Remedial measures
• Paras on this department verification
  procedures would need to be incorporated.
• 9.4 The procedure of verification of Stores of
  the Engineering Dept. (P.Way units) as laid down
  at Para 3314-S to 3318-S in its entirety is not
  followed on this railway. Instead, the
  procedure as laid down at paras 607 to 617 of
  Eastern Railway Stock Verification manual has
  been adopted . The procedure as outlined at
  Paras 3317-S is not compatible with the
  verification process as Material-at-site record
  ledger form (Form E- 1441) is not maintained at
  P.Way units of E. Railway

11

• providing for keeping a daily records of
  receipts and issues. At P.Way units only
  quarterly MAS Returns are maintained for all
  works quoting the estimates . But the mode of
  maintenance of the MAS Return is not fully in
  consonance with the provisions of 1446-E.
• 9.4.1 Remedial Measure
• Since Eastern Railway Stock Verification Manual
  Provisions cannot override the Stores Code
  Provisions of Paras 3314-S to 3318-S, the same
  would need to be modified to be in keeping with
  the Paras 607 to 617 of Eastern Railway Stock
  Verification Manual (or the procedures adopted in
  other Railways S.V. Manual) to have a uniformity
  of application and making the process foolproof
  from the standpoint of according Natural Justice.
  

12

• 9.5 In the matter of enforcing the provisions of
  Para 3320-S relating to workshop verification, it
  is pointed out that unless the modalities of
  verification, as laid down in the Mechanical
  Code, are suitably amended, no proper stock
  verification can be carried out. This is because
  the system of accountal as spelt out in the
  Mechanical Code and the Stores Code Chapter 15
  are not being followed due to there being no
  sub-store manned by DMS at shop level. The
  individual SSEs in shops are acting on similar
  lines as open line stock holders requisiting
  materials directly from the stores depot without
  maintaining NL Card/ledger, so as to be amenable
  to a proper stock verification.

13

• 9.6 Para 3312 laying down the distribution of the
  stock sheets by the stock verifier the original
  copy to the Stores Accounts Officer and the
  duplicate and triplicate copies to the stock
  holder also requires to be amended, in that the
  duplicate copy instead of going to the stock
  holder should be handed over to the divisional
  officer for arranging simultaneous vetting of the
  rates and value of items during the time the
  stockholder takes to submit his explanation for
  consideration of the divisional officer. This
  will cut short the delay in the submission of
  initial reply and/or forcing the stockholder to
  submit his initial reply, in case of loss of
  triplicate copies.
• 9.7 The code does not lay down the guiding
  procedures for steps to be taken to determine
  whether the shortage has occurred due to reasons
  of negligence or due to malafide intentions . In
  other words, in-built in these chapters should be
  the requirement for fact-finding enquiry to affix
  responsibility, on similar lines as provided for
  at Chapter 11 of the Finance Code , Vol. I.

14
10. Remedial Measures for disposal of theft,
claim and Recovery cases ( to be incorporated in
the code).

• Theft Cases
• 10.1 The extant practice is that on occurrence of
  the theft, the stock holder lodges a complaint
  with the local police station, with copy to
  controlling officer, RPF etc. Against the
  shortages due to theft, the stockholder is to
  furnish the FRT ( i.e the Final Report of
  Theft) from the local Police Station, indicating
  the Status of the police enquiry. That is,
  whether the case has been allowed to be closed
  by the Magistrate with remarks No clue found,
  or the case has been remitted to court by
  Registering a criminal case. If the stolen
  materials have been partially or wholly
  recovered, the recovered materials are not
  returned but lie as court exhibits till
  judgement/decree. Thus stock sheets cannot be
  closed till the court case is decreed
  favourably

15

• and the seized stolen materials are returned
  to the stock
• holder for being taken back to account through
  DVS. In
• No clue found cases, necessary write off
  sanction
• (with/without staff responsibility as determined
  in
• departmental Inquiry), duly concurred in by
  Finance, is
• furnished to finalise the stock sheets.
• 10.1.1 Similar is the situation in cases
  originating under UP (RP) Act.
• 10.1.2 In the Eastern Railway, to cut short the
  delay in disposal of stock sheets due to theft
  cases , policy has been adopted for closure
  which is reproduced below (Ref
  F.A..C.A.O(WST)s D.O.NO.SA/SV/Policy/Pt.I
  dt.10.5.2000 to ADRM/T/SDAH).
• 10.1.3 The stock sheets due to theft pending on
  account of court cases may be closed subject to
  the following conditions.

16

• (i) Where No staff is found responsible by the
  competent authority based on the departmental
  enquiry, the case must be scrutinized and found
  acceptable by AO(SV) before considering closure
  of stock sheets.
• (ii) Though the stock sheet is closed,
  particulars must be maintained in a register by
  the Executive as well as AO(SV), (Divl. ISA will
  maintain the Register on behalf of AO/SV at
  divisional level) so as to ensure adequate follow
  up for quick finalization of the court cases and
  subsequent return of the material exhibit kept in
  the custody of RPF/GRP to the respective units by
  the executive department concerned.
• (iii) In case the stolen materials are not
  required to be kept as material exhibits, these
  should be returned immediately and accounted for
  through DVS by the subordinate units.

17

• 10.1.4 Remedical Measures
• In my opinion, the above procedure may need to
  be codified, subject to the following
  consideration.
• a) Seized Material, unless proved to be Railway
  Material before the Trial Court, cannot be
  construed as such without manifest evidence being
  available
• b) In view of the provisions of Rules 222,223
  (especially 223.4), 231(especially 231.4) and 232
  of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987,
  which enjoins a continuous Review Mechanism , it
  should be made incumbent on the RPF to apprise
  the concerned department about the details of the
  materials seized (for comparison with the missing
  / lost material list ), Registration No., Court
  Case No., Date of Filing of charge sheet etc.).
  The Department may, thereafter, Co-ordinate with
  the RPF to get the seized material released at
  the earliest (to prevent deterioration of the
  material), The public prosecutor should be
  requested to make a plea before the

18

• competent Court at the opportune time to get the
  exhibits released for use by the Railways, if
  necessary under Bond. Under Rule 18 of the RPF
  Rules, 1987 the public prosecutors belong to the
  RPF cadre.
• c) The Divisional I.S.A. should be kept in
  formed, to apprise the Accounts Officer for his
  further orders.
• 10.2.1 Claims Cases
• The main reason for delay in finalization of
  Claims cases, (I take it to mean claims
  lying on the Commercial Department for RMC
  materials not reaching destination) is that
  neither the Traffic Department (Both Commercial
  and Operating) do not follow the prescribed
  Rules, as laid down in the Indian Railway
  Commercial Manual and General Rules and
  Supplementary Rules, in the maintenance of Proper
  Records. For instance, in the Goods Inward
  Delivery Book, all materials delivered are
  neither properly recorded with reference to
  Railway Invoice or properly acknowledged, whether
  materials have been delivered on production of RR
  or Indemnity are not clear (Rule 2124-S), Notice
  of Arrival are not issued by Station (Rule
  2123-S) etc.

19

• 10.2.2 Consignees do not lodge Claims directly to
  the CCM within one month of the date of
  booking, as prescribed at Rules 2131-S to
  2134-S.
• 10.2.3 Consignees after lodgment of the Claim, do
  not ensure the Claims Office Index Number for
  chasing the settlement of the claims from time
  to time.
• 10.2.4 Public Claims are closely monitored by the
  Claims Organization to avoid suits, but not
  the Departmental Claims. Claim Tracers are used
  to trace out Missing Wagon in
  case of Public Claims but not in case of
  Railway Claims. The result is that Rules
  relating to Financial Adjustment of Claims
  at 2135-S to 2137-S remains
  unimplemented to enable action for closure of
  Stock sheets.
• 10.2.5 Procedure regarding Rebooking of
  Consignment (Rule 2122-S) and / or Diverted
  Consignments as laid down in IRCM (Vol II ) are
  not followed.

20

• 10.2.6 Remedial Measures
• a) It is the consignors responsibility to
  timely serve the Issue Note and Railway Receipt
  to the Consignee.
• b) If Consignments are diverted enroute at the
  orders of superior Divisional Authority via
  Divisional Control, it should be the
  responsibility of the Departmental Supervisor at
  the control to send the recorded diversion
  particulars to both the Consignor and the
  Consignee under clear acknowledgement. In case of
  failure, responsibility should be fixed on the
  Supervisor at the control.
• c) Timely lodgment of the Claim with
  Commercial Department and keeping a record of
  the CCO office Index No.

21

• d) Periodic Chasing of the Claim with CCO
  office for acceptance of the Claim.
• e) Another important issue, which is overlooked
  by the consignor, is that materials dispatched
  from Departmental Sidings are booked under
  Said to Contain Railway Receipt, in which case,
  the Comml. Department do not admit a claim
  without proper proof -- the onus lying on the
  Consignor. In such a case, it should be mandatory
  in the Rules (both Stores Code and IRCM),that
  loading of consignments even at Departmental
  Siding must also be witnessed by Traffic and RPF
  staff.
• 10.3.1 Recovery Cases
• If the recovery amount is large and effected in
  installments through the Salary of the staff held
  responsible, the stock sheets remain Outstanding
  till completion of recovery. It remains the ISAs
  headache to watch over the recovery to clear the
  stock sheet.

22

• 10.3.2 Remedy -
• For quick finalisation of the stock sheet, the
  remedy is that the competent authority approving
  the recovery must communicate the total amount of
  recovery and the rate of recovery per month to
  the Bill Preparing Officer and Bill Passing
  Officer, mentioning the Bill Unit and
  Accounting Unit. Both the Bill Preparing Officer
  and the Bill Passing Officer must confirm the
  fact of Noting the details of recovery in their
  respective Recovery Registers, quoting Register
  No. ,Page No. and mentioning the name and
  designation of the staff entrusted with the work
  of Bill Preparation and Bill Audit. This
  information must be made available by the
  Executive to enable the ISA to process for
  closure of the Stock sheet. In case of transfer
  of the staff held responsible due to promotion
  etc, the Last Pay Certificate must include the
  outstanding recovery as per Rules, and a copy of
  the vetted LPC must also be furnished to the ISA
  for further action. The Bill Audit Officer must
  furnish monthly the CO7 particulars to ISA to
  enable his furnishing the same for the purpose of
  Annual Statement of Stores Transaction. The
  above procedure must be ingrained in the Rules.

23

• 11. Conclusion
• If the above procedures are properly codified, I
  submit, we will be able to close stock sheets
  early and also defend court cases successfully.
• Submitted by
• Name- Nilendu Sen
• Designation- Sr.ISA
• Office CAO/SV/E.Rly./Kolkata