UNION OF INDIA Vs. NARENDRA PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEPARTMENT of posts has filed the present writ petition assailing the order dated 22nd October, 2010 passed in OA No. 1518/2010 and MA No. 858/2010, by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (Tribunal, for short). By the impugned order, the tribunal has allowed OA filed by the respondent Narendra Pal, quashing the penalty of recovery of Rs.2 lakhs for alleged loss of Rs.6 lakhs caused to the petitioner. The said amount was to be paid in 50 installments of Rs.4000/- each. The amount already recovered has been directed to be refunded without interest.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that loss caused has been proved and in the present case the respondent while working as a postal Assistant at the Saving Bank counter in the Aligarh Head Post office, had accepted 3 cheques of Rs.2 lakhs each, in violation of Rule 29(2) I and 35(6)(10) of the Saving Bank Volume ?I, wherein it is stipulated that maximum balance in a single account should not exceed Rs.1 lakh and in a joint account maximum limit should not exceed Rs.2 lakhs. These cheques were later on encashed.

(3.) IT was in view of the aforesaid facts that the Tribunal had intervened. The tribunal in the impugned order has pointed out that the department authorities had acknowledged that the accounts had been opened prior in time and there was no doubt about the genuineness of the departmental cheques. The fraud not was not committed in the Post Office in question but had been committed on the Sub-Post Office located at Medical College, Aligarh. However, these aspects were ignored and not considered by the departmental authorities. Thus, the tribunal held that there was error and lapse in the decision making process. Therefore, the original application was allowed.