Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Batakrishna Parida vs D/O Post on 17 October, 2023
OA No. SSO ANT AR Seale CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH ginal Ap s Reserved on: 06.16.2023 Pronounced an: / wl ofhe 28 Ke %, CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. Pramod Kumar Das, Member (Admn.) Batakrishna Parida, aged about 39 years, S/o-Late Trinath Parida, resident of Vil/PO - Sialla, PS-~ Kabisuryanagar, Dist- Ganjam, Odisha, PIN- 761109, presently working as Cash Overseer, Aska HQ, Dist - Ganjam, PIN-751110, (Gr. 0} ow pplicant Ror the Applicanh Mr. CP Sahani, Counsel VERSUS i. Union of India, represented through its Secretary cum Lirector General of Posts, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001, a. Chief Post Master General, Odisha Circle, At/P.0. Shubaneswar, Dist. Rhurda, Gdisha - 751001.
3, INrector of Postal Services, Berhampur Region, O/o- PMG, RBerhampur Region, Berhampur (Ganjam) - 760001.
4. Superintendent of Post Offices, Aska [NMvision, Aska (Ganjam)}, PIN-F6U110.
oo Respondents Forthe respondents «Mr. S.KJethy, Counsel "
"hy egy te My, 2 GA No. SAU AITO L019 OR BER Pramod Kumar Das, Membert A):
The applicant, working as Cash Overseer in Aska HO, Ganjam, has Gled this GA challenging and praying to quash the charge sheat vide Memo No. F4-2/2018-19/Sialia BO dated 30,05.2-01 9 at Annexure-A/? and the impugned order of punishment vide Memo No. F4-2/2018- 1a/Siaha BO dated 17.07.2079 at Annexure-A/1? and order af the Appellate Authority vide Meme No. ST /06-13/2019 dated 31.10.2019 at Annexure-A/21 and to direct the respondents to allow all consequential benefits.
9 'The allegation leveled against him in the chargesheet issued under Rule 16 of CCCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide Memo No. Fa-2 f2012-
19/Sialia BO dated 30.05.2-019 under Annexure-A/? reads as under:
"oq Bata Krushna Parida while working as O/S Mail, Aska {ast} SubDivision, Aska doring the period from TLOUS2015 to 720419 had net submitted the result of verification of the balance of all Savings Bank Accounts (SB/RD/TD {SSA} in respect of Sialia BO (in account with KS.Nager $8.0) of his Beat as was ordered ty him by the then Inspector Fos ska (East) Sub-Division, Aske during the year 2016 vide letter No. AsMiac {2016 Dated GLOQGIS followed by reminders dated 81,.09.16,17.10.168 and 19 12.16. The » Inspectar Pasts concerned had issued such order to Sri Parida keeping in view the instruction Jssaed te him by the Superintendent af Past Offices, Aska Division, Aska wide letter Ne. fav fSn- 16/2003 dared SO UL2O16 regarding assignment of offices fer cent percent verification af all bypes of Savings Accounts PSR ROSSA) daring the Naa year 2018.
DA Na AOU? Sas order by the IP, Aska East Sab-
Parida carried out complete verification of all types of Savings Bank Account of Sialia BO in account with KS Nagar 5.0 761104 as was scheduled in the aforesaid letters of IP, Aska East Sub- Division, Aska in time, the modus operandi of Sri Madhaba Naik, GDS BPM, Sralia BO could have been detected earlier and the subsequent fraud committed by him te the tune of more than G8 {eight} Lakhs of Rupees from various accounts could have been averted.
'Therefore, it is alleged that the said Sri Bata Krushna Parida by Nis above action failed to perform the task assigned te him by his superior authority within the tiore set for the purpose. Thereby Sri Bata Krashan Parida failed to maintain devotion to duty and acted in @ manner anbecoming of a Govt. Servants as required ander provision of Rule-3UU) (1) and SCH) af OCs(Conduct) Rules, 1964"
3, The Disciplinary Authority vide Memo No. F4-2/2018-19 /Slala BO dated 17.07.2019 at Annexure-A/17 issued the following orders:
"Phe points raised by the charged official in his defence representation are discussed as undert-
The charged official while working as 0/9 Mails during the perfor from 11.07.2015 to 22.04.19 was attached to Asks (Rast) Sab-Division, Aska, He was warking under the direct control of the IP, Aska East Sub-Dn. Hence in addition to the usual duties, the IP Aska East had entrusted the work to the charged official for carrying owt of cent percent verification of all types of SB accounts of Sialia 80 and two other 8.0s to the charged official in view of the instruction issued to him in this regard by the 5POs, Aska Division, Aska: vide letter No. Inv/STT- 16/2003 dated 27.01.2016 for the year 2016. Generally such yeriicaton are carried out by the O/S Mails attached to G/O the Sate Divisional IPO all ever Indis and itis not an uniue case, that the work had been entrusted to 0/8 Matis in Aska Hast Sabe Division. So the allegation of the charged official that he was not empowered /cormpetent to de cent percent verification af all types of SB accounts Independently is not acceptable It Saye says that the charged Oficial had already decided that es wauld set carry ont the order of the IP regarding cent percent verification of Siatia BO and thus it is treated as vialation af Instruction of Directorate which has prescribed such verification to curb occurrence of fraud in Bs. Sech type of deSance an the part of the charged abe ial defeated the Very pare of the scheduled programme sd hy the Divisional Office, Asks for the calendar year 2016 regarding carrying out ef complete veriication of balance in all Qypes of Savings Arcounts of afuresaid BOs.
Hence i8 no circumstances the charged official can shrink his responsibilty on Wimey grounds.
2. The letter No. A/Misc/2016 dated 01.06.16, 0109.16, 17.10.16 and 2 183 es L1G issued by che IP. Aska Easr Sub-Division regarding ener Rng of the wark for cent percent verification of Slialla BO and two other 60s of his Sub-Divisian te the charged official was sissued white e th > charged afficial was attending the same office where the f Aske Eas " was working during the year 2016. During that tine bath the charged official and IF, Aska East were sitting Ineide a same office and acraas one table. The charged official was a staff af the ve Aska Rast while he was working as 8 §S Mail, Hence the IP. A: :
ht she d over the aforesaid written orders fo the by hand. Hence the charged official bad already wd | bo | those records daring his Iamanbency as O/5 Mall, Aske Fast Sub-Division {fis quite undesirable that [P would send letters by Regd. past or other means ta the afficisis who are silting in a same affics and across the table. The G/S Mails are subordinate to IP in his affice and are also bound to carry out even verbal arders in all cases. So the argument of the Charged official made In his request application dated 14.06.2019 to shaw him the proof of delivery of the aforesaid letter of the IP, Aska East and in his defence representation dated 01.07.2019 (submitted to Divisional Office on O3.07.2019) alleging non receipt of such orders frem the if concerned is not at all tenable.
Thas i is proved that Sri Bata Krishna Parida, Attached Cash O/S, Aska HO while working as 0/5 Mails, Aska East Sub Division, Aska during the peried from LL07.2015 to 22.04.19 displayed gross negligence in duty for which Sri Madhab Naik, GOSBPM, Sialia BO ceuld be able to make permanent misappropriation of public money out of the transactions of various types of SB/RD/STODYSSSA accounts tae the fine of Rs.8,29,746)/- ag detected so far. This fraud ameaint may alka soup in future In due course of farther loquiry. Gut of the sald fraud aah ? GA Ne. BOQ /QUT HB S2019 amount detected, fraud te the tune of Rs.56,000/- had occurred prior to the year 2016, Had Sri Bata Krishna Parida started cent percent verification af all types of SE accounts of Sialia BO in early part of 2016 as ordered te him by the then IP, Aska Bast Sub-Division, Aska, the fraud committed by the principal offender prior to the year 301% could have heen detected and the subsequent fraud of Rs.7,79,746/- (Rs.8,29,7 46.00- Rs. 50,006.00) occurred during the year 2016 and thereafter would have been averted. Thus Sci Bata Krishna Parida while warking as Of8 Mails, Aska East Sub-DHvisien, Aska had displayed a major segment af negligence in duty amangst che subsidiary offenders Invelved Nisha 8O frand case which provided scope to the principal offender Sti Madhaba Naik, @DSBPM. Sialla BO es commit fraud te the tune of lgkhs af rupees. Thereby Sri Hate Krishna Farida fslled to mamtain devotion to duty and acted in a manner which is unbecoming of # Gavermment servant violating the provision of Rule 3(2}{H) and a¢L}Gu) of the ccS{Conduct} Rales, 1064 and deserve severe punishment, i have carefully gane through the records of this case and found Sri Gate Krishna Parida guilty of the charge leveled against him. So, | Set Bipin Bikari Neg, Superintendent of Post Offices, Aska Divisien, Aska arder that a sum of Rs RADOE!- (Rupees six lakh forey thousand eight hundred) only be recovered from the pay of Sri Hata Krishna Parida mM 72 (seventy two} installments @ Rs 8900/- (Rapees eight thousand nine hundred) only per month starting from the pay af month August 2019"
4. 'The order passed by the Appellate Authority vide Memo No. ST /06-13/2019 dated 34.10.2019 at Annexure-A/ei on the appeal preferred by the applicant reads as under:
"{ have gone through article of charge, defence representadon, appeal of Sri Parida and other related records of the case carefully & applied my mind dispassfonately and found that , The averments made by the Appellant that he was not allowed ta sit in the LDCE does nat relate to vhis case. The allegation in question is related to another issue regarding steps taben by SPOS, Aska Division in obedience ta the Regional Office Letter . iscomplete ui.
eee is, No. RES2 TER /PAYSA P18 dated wAzBeie 'The punishment of "the charged official be reduced by G1 fone} stage fram Rs. 26,200 /> to Rs 26,000/-{from cel] 08 to OF in the pay mairin levels Hil for a periad of 03 fehree} years with effect fom GLORY fe is farther directed that he will ears micrement during the period of reduction and that on the expire of the period, the reduction will not have effect the postponing his fature increments of nay" awarded the Appellant by the Disciplinary Authority {Inspectar Posts, Aska cast Sub-Division, Aska 7OIT4 Q} in anather case under Mears No. PY {B.R Farida Ds at OF GAULT was current a8 such the appellant was oof allowed 'amited Departmental allegation brought by the appellant against he SPtis, Aska Division, Aska pe Re oy at nigh ly baseloss.
& Bs The service of the Overseers af Mails working under Postal Sub-Divisiens is fo carry aut the orders of Sub-Divisional Head for cent percent verification of all types af Savings gecounts in addition to their usnal duties.
While working as Overseers of Mails, the Appellant had already necessed the letters issued by the IP, Aska Fast Syb-Division in this matter. Hence 28. recall yepresentahon dated JARS ZO1S and 36.0208 9. she Disciplinary Autharkty id not feel necessary to permib oie appellant 60. Berek the documents again. However the appellant wes allowed OF {seven} days more time i one oceagian and 03 (tures) days more time in another pecaston £0 submit his defence representation. Altogether the appellant got an apportanity of 38 days from OT ORLOTS to OLOP ALS ta subenit bis defence representation. The defence represeniadan of the appellant was received by Disciplinary Authariiy on Os.07. 2015 and the Charge sheet was Snalized on £7.07 2019 duly taking into cansideration of his defence representation dated OLO?F. 2019. Hence the contention af the appellant drat his defence representation dated OLOF2018 has nat been eaken inte consideration is not correct.
The Rule-16 praceading was finalized on 17.07.2019 and the mama released of SS. G8.2019, Delay ip relaase of the Rnatigation order de Rot minimize the culpability a ihe charged afficial ? OA No. DAY OUTES SY vy Siala BO fraud case came to light on 17.07.2016. Hence occurrence of fraud of Rs. S0000/- daring the year 2016 has been ascertained only after detection of the fraud. Soon after detection of the fraud, the SP Os Aska Division bas issued order ro investigate into the case. Hence the contentian of the appellant that, the Disciplinary Authority dict not take action to investigate isto the case as early as possible is not correct. The service of the Overseer of Mails working under Postal Sub- Divisions is to carry out the orders of Sab-Divisional Head for cent percent verification of all types af Savings accounts in addition to his usual duties.
vi. The Appellant while working as Overseers of Mails during the period fram LLO7.2015 te 33.04.2019 was under Aska (East) Sub-DNvision, Aska. He was under the direct eontral of the IP. Aska Bast Sub-D. The IP Aska East had entrusted the wark {9 the Appellant for carrying out of cent percent verifeation of all types of Savings accounts of Sialic BO and bwo other Bs in view of the 100% verification pragramme fixed by the SPQs, Aska Division, Aska vide letter, Na. Inv/STT-16/2603 dated 22.01.2016 far the year 2016. Fram the averments made by the appellant, it is evident that the appellant had already decided not te carry out the order of the IP regarding cent percent verification of Slalia BO and thus it is treated as violation of instruction of Directorate which has prescribed such verification to curb occurrence of fraud in B.0s. Such ope of defiance on the part of the appellant defeated the very parpase of the scheduled programune issued by the Divisional Office, Aska for the calendar year 2016 regarding carrying axt of complete verification of balance in all types of Savings Accounts of aforesaid BOS. Hence in no circumstances the appellant can shrink his responsiblity on fimey grounds, vil Regarding Issue of charge sheet against the appellant on same nature af offence for his fallure te carry out the order af IP concerned over the wark for cent percent verification of all types af Savings Accounts of Hindala 80, Ballichhai BO and Sialia BO, it is observed that, these three BOS were included for cent percent verification in the scheduled programme for the year 2016, But in the due course, fraud to the tune of more than 8 lakhs rupees were detected in Stalia BO. Tf the appellant would have started the past work verification af Siatia BO in time as per programme, then the fraud would have been detected earlier and thereby loss would have oe 8 DA Nex 260 HOTEB SOLS been minimized. As at now, Cie frend amount so far detected is more than Rupees Right Lakhs and die same may go up if future during futher investigation as the past wark of the office is yet to be completed. Keeping in view the amount of fraud so far detected and charges leveled againat the appellant, the Disriplinary Authority has issued punishment order dated TOF R01 Aisa taking Inte account the gravity and importance of the iasue, separate charge sheet has been framed against the appellant for Siala BO fraucl cage.
ii, The allegation of the appellant in question relates fo another issue regarding communication of the decision of the aypellate authority an the panishmest order issued by the IP, Aska f€ast} Subdivision, Aska vide Memo No. FR/ RB. K. Parida dated. O4.08. 2017. The Order No. BS (Disc) dated 18.06.2018 has not been cammunicated to the appellant at any tune The appellant might have tactfully collected the copy of the said arden, ix. The Appellant has been given reasonable opportunity at each and every stage of the proceedings.
"oniributory peplice Mi. The Disciplinary Authority by taking into account the gravity of the charges levelled against the appellant, has Analiaed the case and seed punishment orderan 1S.07 2019, jn view of the above, 1 Sri.G. Gummathan, Director af Postal Services (NO), Circle Oifice Bhubaneswar being empowered to exercise the statutory powers DPS, Berhampur Division Rerhampor vide Circle Office L. No. ST/2-35(2)/2015 of Dated 9.082016 have gone thraagh the appeal preferred by the appellant and all other connected records of the case very carefully and found that the amount ef recovery ordered is very high and hereby order that the recovery be reduced by 50% Le.
instead of Rs 6,40,800/- (Rupees Six lakh forty thousand eight hundred) only, an amount of Rs 320,400 /- (Rupees Three lakh Gventy thousand four bandred] any be recovered from the pay of the appellant, said Syi BL. Parida @ Rs 8,900/- (Rupees Bight thasand nine hundred) only per month jn 36 (thirty six} equal monthly Instaliments.
Thus the appeal is dispased off"
y GA No, 2A FSR SOS
5. Respondents filed their counter In which it has been stated that the applicant was proceeded against Rule-16 of CCS{CCA} Rules, 1965 vide this office Memo NoF4-2/2018-19/Sialia BO dated 30.05.2039. Since he while working as 0/S Mail, Aska (Rast) Sub-Division, Aska during the period from 11.07.2015 to 22.04.2019 had not submitted the result of verification of the balance of all Savings Bank Accounts (SB/RD/T D/ SSA} in respect of Sislia BO {in account with Kabisuryanagar §.0} of his beat area as was ordered to him by the then inspector Posts, Aska (East) Sub-Division, Aska during the year 2016 vide letter Na. A/Misc/2016 dated 01.06.2016 followed by reminders dated 01.09.2016 and 19.12.2016. The aforesaid order dated 01.06.2016 was Issued by the Inspector Pests, Aska (Rast) Sub- Divisiun to him as per the direction issued by Resp. No.4 vide letter dated 22.01.2016 towards assignment of offices for cent percent verification of all types of Savings Bank Accounts (SB/RD/TD/SSA) for the calendar year 2016. Despite order by the then IP, Aska (East) Sub- Division, Aska, the applicant did not submit the verification report of Sialia BO violating the Instruction of his higher authority and for such lack of devotion ta duty and defiance to the orders of his superiors, the modus operand! of 20 SA Ne VEN OOF ASLAN $4 Madhaba Naik, GDS BPM, Sialla BO could not be detected and he went on misappropriating public money fram the various SB Accounts of Siaia BO to the tune of Rs. 08 eight} lakhs. Hence, by such act, the applicant failed to maintain absolute devotion to duty and acted ina manner unbecoming of a government servant, for which, if was proposed to take action against the applicant under Rule-16 of CCS (CCA Rules, 1965.
it has heen averred that being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of punishment of the Disciplinary Authority, the applicant fled OA Ne. §43/2019 before this 'pibunal, in which vide order dated 22.08.2019 respondents were directed not to recover any amount if pursuance to the impugned order, from the salary of the applicant for the month at August, 2019, Meanwhile, applicant preferred his appeal. The QAon the consent of the Ld Counsel for the applicant was disposed of on 11.09.2019 with direction to the Appellate Authority to consider and dispose of the appeal. The appeal of the applicant was disposed of by reducing the penalty of recovery by S04, Le. from Rs.640,800/- to Rs.3,70,400/- on installments. Since the applicant has felled in discharging his onernus duties, charge sheet was issued to him under BS OA No. BA OOT REO LS Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA} Rules, 1965 and, after following due process of rules and principles of natural justice, the proceedings were culminated by the Disciplinary Authority by imposition of punishment of recovery af Rs. 6,40,800/-, which was upheld by the Appellate Authority but considering the gravity of the matter the amount of recavery was reduced to Rs, 3,20,400/~ Thus, according to the respondents, there being no illegality or lrregularity in the matter, there is hardly any scope for this Tribunal to interfere.
6 According to the Ld. Counsel for the applicant, the entire proceedings were initiated in malice and with malafide exercise of power and, thus, the applicant is entitled to the relief claimed in this OA. it has been stated that, according to the respondents, the direction for inspection was of the year 3016 and the if the same was net carried out, the applicant ought to have been proceeded against immediately but no reason has been assigned for issuance of the charge sheet after a lapse of three years, Le. in the year 2019. As per the statutory provision under Rule 169, 343, 344 and 355 of Postal Manual, Vol. VIN, itis the Inspector of Post Offices (IP) has to carry out the inspection. The DA In lis letter dated 72.01.2018, issued Instruction to the LP., Aska East Sub-Division, ~ 32 QA No, INO /HOTSE/ INN Aska to carry out the verification work duly assisted by the 0/5 Mails. Accordingly, a programme for calendar year 2016 was prescribed and sent for information and necessary action. If was further directed in the said letter that hundred percent verification af afl types of savings accounts of respective offices should be completed and verification list be prepared at BO/SO point within two weeks of respective months. fis submitted that sub-delegation of power Is per se illegal and veld ab initio mM absence of any specific provision. Thus, the Inspector af Post Offices ought not to have entrusted the said work to the applicant, which he was under obligation to do as per the rules and letter dated 22 O1.2016 with the assistance of O/S Mails (applicant) but drawing disciplinary proceedings alleging failure to discharge the duties against the applicant letting off the Inspector of Post Offices, Aska East aub- Hivision, Aska for not discharging Ns duties statutorily provided under the rules shows the malice against the applicant. Further, {6 substantiate that the culmination of the proceedings by imposition of punishment is in violation of law and natural justice, Ld. Counsel for the applicant drew the attention of this THibunal to the allegations made In the charge sheet vis a vis the arder of the DA and AA and has submitted fue Spe OA Nu. 2HOsNO7 SR 2015 that the DA without considering the above aspect of the matter travelled heyond the allegation in the charge sheet and imposed the punishment on conjecture, surmises and in a hypothetic manner. The AA also did the same thing in his order even hy observing that "on examination of the case has revealed that, the appellant is responsible for the amount af loss as imposed upon him due to his contributory negligence in the task assigned to him by the then IP, Aska East Sub-Division, Aska". His further contention is that the applicant has been visited with the punishment without any evidence because the direction was to the inspector of Posts, Aska East Sub-Division, Aska fo complete the inspection and, according to the respondents, the Inspector, Aska East Sub-Division, Aska vide letter dated OL0G6.20160 1.09 201617. 10.2016 and 19.12.20 16 directed the applicant to complete the inspection. The applicant stoutly denied te have received any such letter directing him to complete the inspection but the DA as well as AA without any substantiating material to the extent that such letters were issued and served on the applicant in reality came to the conclusion based on presumption and assumption that since the Inspectar of Post are working in the same office, the letter must have been served, which a4 GA No. 260A SS cannat pass the test of reasonableness. Accordingly, it has been submitted that since the imposition of punishment was nothing bat malicious exercise of power, with gross violation of rules, principle of natural justice and with nu evidence, he is entitled to the relief claimed inthe DA.
3 Qn the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the respondents by reiterating the stand taken in the counter, order of the DA and AA has submitted that none of the grounds argued by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant can have any effect because itis settled law that the court and tribunal being not the appeal late authority over the decision of the competent authority of the department, cannot sit over their decision, which wa ihe taken after considering all aspect of the matter. Accordingly, respondents have prayed for dismissal of this OA.
8. Before proceedings ahead on the arguments advanced by the parties, it is worthwhile to quote Rule 169, 343, 344 and 355 of Postal Manual, Vol. VIL in seriatim, as under:
"480, Overseers' beats. (1) Overseers' beats sheuid be so arranged as ta suit in the best way thelr various duties. The heat of an overseer should comprise the mail Hnes fmail and branch} placed under his charge. and the afflees {iF any} which he is required to yisit in connertion with cash remittances: One of the affices slhusted In the suarseer's beat Should be fixed as his central offices, Wheo his duties include the conveyance or escort af cash, the central office should be an office situated at a treasury or sub-treasury states, oF eise B cash 1s DA No. BAU/QITIR INES office sa situated that it can be made the basis of the averseer's work in connection with the transport of cash, that is to say, an office from wich be can take funds for supply to sub-offices and te which he can bring back the surplus collections made over to him by sub-alfices. The overseer should be required te return to his central office regularly at fixed intervals which should ordinarily be not longer than seven days. When the overseer has to convey or escort cash remittances, it will sometimes be necessary that he should return to the central office at sherter intervals. H the central office is conveniently situate, it will often be possible to arrange that the overseer shall return to it every third or fourth day, and thus visit it neice, or even thrice, before he has made the round of all his offices. (2) The Superintendent must prepare a route statement for each averseer in his division, showing the period to be occupied by the averseer's circuit af the lines thet he has to supervise and the offices {ifany} which he bas to serve In connection with the transpert of cash, the dates in each manth or the day or days of the week on which each cirenit is to being and the fines and the offices (if any} to be visited during the circult, arranged in the order in which they are to be visited, The dates or days af the week on which each line or affice is te be visited' need not be prescribed. 1¢ will be found sufficient to require the awerseer to visit in the time fixed al] the Hues and offices shown in his route statement. Te require him to visit each affice on a particular day would tie him down too strictly and prevent him from properly supervising bis mail Hnes. The greatest care is necessary In javing down the route that the overseer should take for each complete ciraut of all the offices that he has to serve in connection with the transport of cash. Those sub and branch offices which are in commenieation with the head offices ar cash offices or account offices by rail, streamer or mail cart Hnes or by perfectly safe runner's Hines, need not be entered fn the route statement at all. But sll offices from which the overseer has to supply fils must be entered once or mare often, according te the amount of their transactions, and the intervals chat can be allowed te slapse bebween Qvo withdrawsls of their surplus collections or {vo replenishments of their balances. The Superintendent should furnish each overseer, central affice and ingpector with a copy af the route statement (3) Overseers will be directly subordinate to the laspector but this will net relieve the Superintendent of the duty and responsibility of exercising constant and vigilant supervision over their work.
NOTE «+ & may be nacessary for an overseer to leave the route laid down in bis route statement in order te Inquire into a case of loss or "a aw 18 OA Ka, SOG ANSE YS to make arrangements for the conveysack af mails in another part of his beat, etc. and in such cases he may not he able to complete his efrenit within the preserited time. When in any such case, the averseer's doties Inclinle Che conveyance oF escort of cash, the Superintendent should, Wf necessary, make ather arrangements fpr the trangpert of cash fo or from the offices which the overseer cansory gat in the usual course"
"243 Duties of overseer ~ The oversees is 9 dmaniy responsible for the @licient working of the mail I tine or fines onder his charge: but he may alse, under the arders of the Head af the Circle, be required $3 convey ar escort MNUMAACES aetween two offices either under a reguiar system or ag occasion & sags. He will be held personally responsible that the mals are con d at the prescribed rate of speed. Ne must constantly travel over his beat te supervise the ronners, and ty satisty different stages when the mallarrives. Where huts are provided for Che rarmners, che overseer must see that they hve in tham and not in the neighboring villages and that where there is 0 hut at a stage, the manners awa ¢ the arrival of the yal at some selected spat.
< NOTE tT. Should an overseer, ats any time notice any damage is 6 telegr ph fing, the nature and position of the accident should be reported by him at once to the wea rest post office. Runners shagid be instructed to similarly repert any damage noticed by them.
NOTE &- Where the Cash conveyance work is heavy, the Head of & Circle may sanction Overseers €xc tusively for such work. They will be designated Cash Overseers exclusively far such work. They will be designated Cash Overseers, it is, However, open fo the Head af a Circle 3 to specily any ot cher duties to be attended to In addition to Tasn COMVEVANCE."
"344. Overseer ¢ beats ~ (2) The beat of an overseer will be arranged by the Super etendent and will comprise the main AEs (main and on 'hy placed ansder hi is charge and the offices OF any) chat he is required to visit in connect! swith cash remittances. One of rhe offices situated in the beat wil tbe selected | py the Superintendent ay the aversear's central office and he wi il be required to return toe rhat affice regularly at fixed intervals.
C2] The Superintendent wit fernish each overseer with a ronte statenient show! ing the period ty be a <cupied | by the circuit of the lines which he has ta supervise and Ue offices (if any} which he has to serve in canmechian with the transport of cash, the dates in each ce Ba Mn OA No. SOU SUOTAR TY } month or the day or days of the week on which he must be at Als central office in order to begin each circuit, and the lines and names of the offices (if any} ta be visited during the circuit, arranged in order in which they are to be visited. The overseer will not be required to visit each Hne or office on a particular day; but he will be required fo visit, in the time Axed, all the Hines and offices shown in bis route statement NOTE ~ it may not be possible in every case for the overseer fo complete his circuit within the prescribed time awing to his having to proceed te another part of his beat In order to enquire into a loss case or make mail arrangements, etc"
"255 Owerseer's diary, ~ (1} Every overseer mast keep a diary in form (Genl. 4) in which he should enter every day particulars af the travelling done by him, the names of stages visited, arrangements made for the conveyance of extra-despatches or cash remittances, substitutes appainted in place of runners absent, irregularities and offences cammitted by the road establishment, leave applications fram runners and all other matters on which orders are required ar which should be brought to the nafice of the Superintendent or fuspector, The signatures of the postmasters of offices visited shorald also be taken in the diary.
2) The overseer should, when travelling over his beat, examine the condition and seals of the bags carried by the runners and the books and the articles in the custody of the village postmen or pastnen whom he happens to meet, and of certain percentage, as fixed by the Head of the Circle af money orders, paid by postinen and village postmen in bis jurisdiction but the nermber should not he lass than §} in arnanth. The particulars of the money order and the result of the verification should be noted in his diary and in the Monthly Hat of money orders verified {Form Genl.6) submitted with the manthly summary (Genl.12}. He should also abtain as money receipts as passible from the remitters of money orders and see that the date and ather entries on cach receipt correspond with those in the counterfoll bearing the same number in the book of receipts and not the resull and the mumber of the receipts so verified In his diary. He should also from Kime to time enguire from the residents of the villages through which he passes whether they receive their letters and money order payments punctually, and report In his dary any complaisis made by villagers in regard to the delivery of letters or the clearance f letter:
hoses or the payment of money orders. The Overseer should verify she balances in cash and stamps of branch offices situated in his beat and, if required by the Superintendent, the balances in cash and atamps of small subaffices situated im his beat, and repart the result of 38 GA Ke. SSOP NUTS 2EL ehe check in his diary. He should also check the usexl and unused branch office receipts in the current books of receipts to see that they ave in consecutive series up to Li) and that the used ones have been igsued in chronological arder. Ne should also compare the dates af jase and other particulars on the branch office caunterfails with those on the relative account office receipts, and if he noticns any disagreement between the dates wich is not covered by the normal period of transit fram the branch aflce ta the account office, OF any ather discrepancy, such as difference in the amount of money orders and name of payees or addresses, ete. he should forthwith take ap enquiries Inte the matter, reporting the fect to the subdisisional Inspector. He should alse check the aged and unused receipts In the current book of Savings Bank Preliminary receipts fo see that they are ay sonsecutive order and that the ased ones have been jasued in ebronological order ancl that the amounts for which such receipts have been issued since the last visit have been acepunted for in the Branch Office account cerrectly. Ne should also see that pass hooks for new accounts were received from the Head Office within reasonable time ard delivered to the depositors and that te depositer's copy of the Savings Rank Preliminary receipt acknowledging the pass book has been pasted on the office copy of the relative preliminary receipt. The resalt af the checks should alyays he nated by the Overseer in his diary and in the order book of the branch office. The results af the checks carried out in accordance with the provisions af the checks rarried out In accardance with the provisions of rule 168 A should also be noted in the diary. He should aise be required fo make enquiries ito miner complaints inchiding cases of logs provided be is capable af doing the work properly.
(3) The entries In the diary shouid be made in duplicate, and at the and of each weeks, Le. on the Ist, 8th, 16th, and 24th of each month, the upper of the two leaves farming the diary for the preceding week, should be torn out of the book and dis: atcha to the [nspectar to whorn a surmmary of work in form (Genl-12) should be sent with the diary for the last week of the month. Ordinarily, the diary should he the only cormmunication addressed by the overseer to the [nspectan separate reports by letter should be submitted anly in argent Cases, when early arders are required. The overseers shauid note in their diaries the hours of Gieir arrival at and departure from post offices visited.
NOTE 1~ When taldag aver bags af a stage where there iS no post office, runners are required to examune their condition and seals and, W any damage ls noticed, fo make a report lh) the firse post office that is passed, The overseer should satisfy Bimsell, when travelling over HES * awe denenaneninanettettnettty, WAU PU ARE LES 2 OA No. 260/GOTAH L209 heat, that this duty is understood by the runners, and state in his diary whether the bags are examined at such siages.
NOTE 2. The office copies of an overseers diary should be destroyed twelve months after the date on which they were prepared"
Q, After giving due consi deration to the facts of the matter, materials placed in support thereof and arguments advanced by the parties cancerned, perused the rules quoted above vis a vis the records of QA 18/2019 filed by the applicant before this Tribunal. From the record, it is established that the direction of the Supdt. of Past Offices, Aska tivision dated 22.01.2016 (R/6} was to the Inspector of Post Offices, Aska East Sub Division to complete hundred percent verification of all types af savings accounts af respective offices and to prepare verification list at BO/SO point within two weeks of respective months with the assistance of O/S Mails. Although, the applicant disputed the lettes stated to have been issued by the Inspector of Pasts directing the applicant to do the inspection work, conceding for a moment that wark ought to have been done by the applicant, when he did not do the inspection within the stipulate period, he should have been taken to task immediately but what was the need to wait till 2019 to issue the charge sheet when there was a conflict relating to appearing the 20 QA No. SHOOTER EOS applicant in LDCE Examination for PA/SA, which was the subject matter of the GA No. 18/2019 although the well known principle ts that the life cannot be breathed into the stillborn charge memorandum. The charge sheet, the order of the DA, order of the AA and even the counter is conspicuously silent on the above aspect,
10. This Tribunal is reminiscent and redolent to the observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs B.V.Gopinath, Civil Appeal No.7 761 of 2013 arising out of SUP (C.) No. 6348 of 2014) asunder "The rule against delegation a diacredlonary power ONuSt, in general, be exercised aniy by the authority te which i has heen committed. His 8 well-known principle of law that when a power has been confided to a person in circumstances indicating that trust is being placed fm his aividual judgment and discretion, he must exercise that power persanafly unfess he has been expressly smpowered to delegate if to anwther' The same principle haa been described in "Administrative Law" FUWR. Wade & CF. Forsyth (Ninth Edition), Chapter YO, as folawar "Taalonable diseretionary power An element which is essennial e the Jaw?ul exercise of pewver is that it should be exercised BY the authority upon whom it is conferred, and by no one aise. The principie is strictly applied, even where H causes administrative incanvenience, except in cases where it may reasonably be inferred that the power was Intended te be delegable. Normally the courts are rigorous in requiring the power to be exercised bY the precise person or bady stated in the statute, amd in condemning as ultra vires action takert by agents. sub- cammittess op delegates, however expressly authorized by the authority endowed with the power"24 A No. SHY AOT ZO LY
Going by the law, the order issued by the Inspector of Posts Offices seems to be contrary to the well settle dictum accepted in law. Further, it is noticed that there was no allegation in the charge sheet what has been observed by the AA in its order that "examination of the case has revealed that, the appellant is responsible for the amount af lass as imposed upon him due to his contributary negligence in the task assigned to him by the then IP, Aske Bast Sub-Division, Aska". So alsa, the emphasized portion of the order of the DA and AA would undoubtedly evident that both the authorities came to the conclusion based on the facts, which were not the part of the allegation in the charge sheet and were passed on hypothesis, which {x in violation of the principle of natural justice. When the applicant has disputed to have received any such letter of the Inspector of Posts, onus Hes on the departmental authorities to prove with documentary evidence that the said letters were actually served on the applicant, which they failed to do and by drawing inference that since the inspector of Posts and the applicant are working in the same post office, they observed that the letter must have heen served: despite the well settle law that however suspician grave may be that cannot be praved in domestic enquiry. Admittedly, ne gach a a 22 QANY, THO POETS SEY proceeding has been initiated against the Inspector of Post Offices. Considering the totality of the matter, It is abundantly established that this is a case where the applicant visited with the punishment with no evidence and in violation of principles of natural justice /Rules/Law.
li. in Wew of the discussions made above, the impugned Memo No. F4-2/2018-19/Sialia BO dated 17.07.2019 (Annx-A/?) and the Memo No. ST/O6-18/2019 dated 34.10.2019 (Anmx-A/21} are hereby quashed. The Respondents are hereby directed to refund the amount already recovered as the outcome of the aforesaid orders to the applicant within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date af receipt ofa copy of this order.
12. fn the result, this OA stands allowed to the extent stated above by leaving the parties to bear thelr own costs.
(PRAMOD KUMAR DAS) MEMBER (ADMN,) RES PS