DIMAPUR, MAY 3 (MExN): The Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench has directed the Commissioner Vigilance, Government of Nagaland to hold an enquiry to find out as to how a Cheque amounting to over Rs one crore had been withdrawn from the concerned bank and also where the money had gone. The court passed the order in relation to allegations made in a petition stating that all the entitlement and benefits pertaining to ex-seasonal employees of the erstwhile Nagaland Sugar Mills Co Ltd (NSMC) amounting to Rs 1,23,03,580/- had gone missing into the wrong hands with involvement of NSCN (IM) functionaries also surfacing.
In response to the petition, the State respondents also filed an affidavit in opposition stating that all the entitlement and benefits pertaining to the ex-employees of NSMC amounting to Rs 1,23,03,580/- had been released vide Cheque no 331998 dated 23-04-04 for disbursement by the Director of Industries and Commerce, Government of Nagaland. The affidavit made by the State respondents also stated that the said Cheque had been handed over to one Visheke Sema, the Chairman, Adhoc Committee Seasonal Ex-employees, NSMC Ltd Dimapur vide a letter dated 26-04-04.
Denying this Visheke Sema filed an affidavit in opposition stating that as Chairman, Adhoc Committee Seasonal Ex-employees, he had never received any letter from the Director of Industries and Commerce informing about the release of the said Cheque and that he never received the said Cheque either from any official respondents or Government department. It was also stated in the affidavit that Visheke Sema and others went to meet the Director of Industries at Kohima and submitted an application requesting him to release the amount of Rs 1,23,03,580/- for payment to the seasonal employees but the Director asked them to meet him on 27-04-04 at his office.
Visheke Sema, who is respondent no 7 further, states in the affidavit that on 27-04-04 at about 7 am the deponent however received a telephone call from one Mr Azheto, a high functionary of the NSCN (IM) asking the deponent to meet him at the 4th Mile residence of Khekiho, Minister Industry and Commerce. On arriving at the residential gate of the Minister along with one Saban Rai, Secretary of the Adhoc Committee, a messenger informed the deponent that he should proceed to the residence of one Mr Vishito also of the NSCN (IM) and residing at 4th Mile.
On meeting Mr Vishito the deponent was asked to receive an amount of Rs 30,00,000/- and issue a money receipt on behalf of all the seasonal employees of the company. The deponent flatly refused to do so and left the residence of Mr Vishito only to return at the insistence of Mr Rai to make proper enquiries on the matter. The Chairman, Adhoc Committee Seasonal Ex-employees further stated that on his return, he was threatened and compelled to receive an amount of Rs 16,31,000/-. It was further stated that Mr Vishito had already made payment for sum of Rs 13,69,000/- to twelve of the employees who had also reached the residence of Mr Vishito.
Of the money received amounting to Rs 16,31,000/- the deponent (Mr Visheke Sema) made payments for Rs 12,95,298/- only to the employees on first come first basis while the balance amount of Rs 3,35,702/- only was handed to Mr Saban Rai, Secretary of the Adhoc Committee for making necessary payments to the employees of the company.
Later it may be mentioned that the deponent (Mr Visheke Sema) had received legal notice from the lawyer (dated 3-01-05) of some of the seasonal employees, questioning the non-payment of the retirement schemes. The deponent had on 15-01-05 replied that with the exception of Rs 30,00,000/- only which has been distributed to some employees of the company, the deponent never received the Cheque no 331998 amounting to the total Rs 1, 23, 03,580/-.
The court observed that this being the position of the deponent so far, it was now for the official respondent to clearly prove with records as to whom the Cheque no 331998 amounting to Rs 1, 23, 03,580/- was issued and how a part of the money meant for payment to the employees of the Sugar Mill Company fell into the hands of certain unauthorized persons who were not at all suppose to have custody of such money. “It is the official respondent who can best explain this situation and not the answering deponent”, the court observed in its judgement while giving the Vigilance Commissioner a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order (26-04-07) to hold enquiry and necessary compliance.
.jpg)
