TUKARAM BABAN GADEKAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 for quashing and setting aside the orders passed by the respondents imposing penalty of removal from service. On 10.03.2004 the applicant was appointed as Gramin Dak Sevak and was posted as Branch Post Master at Kavthe Malkapur Branch Post Office under Sakur Sub -Post Office under Shrirampur Postal Division in Ahmadnagar District. On 31.05.2006 the applicant accepted 3 Electric Bills amounting to Rs. 1860. However through oversight he arrived at a total of Rs. 1070/ - instead of Rs. 1860/and thus, credited Rs. 790/ - less amount in Treasury. Further on 16.06.2006 he received 5 telephone bills amounting to Rs. 1831/ -. However through oversight credited Rs. 1731/ - only i.e. Rs. 100 short. Again on 26.08.2006 the applicant collected Rs. 3201/towards 7 telephone bills. However calculated total of Rs. 3101/ - and credited this amount instead of Rs. 3201/ - i.e. less by Rs. 100/ -. The above lapse of crediting less amount of Rs. 790/ -, Rs. 100/ - & Rs. 100/ - was rectified by crediting the said amounts, when this fact was noticed during inspection of accounts on 23.11.2006.

(2.) ON 05.04.2007 the applicant was served with a charge memo (Annexure A -4) including statement of imputation, list of documents and list of witnesses, initiating disciplinary action against him under Rule 10 of Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Employment) Rules, 2001 (for short GDS Rules). The applicant submitted his reply (Annexure A -13) to the charge memo denying that he committed misappropriation of Government funds and contended that through oversight and mistake in calculation he credited less amount than what was actually received by him from the customers and hence he should be reinstated. He also gave an undertaking that he will be careful in future and shall not commit such mistake.

(3.) CONSIDERING the enquiry proceeding and the report submitted by the Inquiry Officer, the Disciplinary Authority -respondent No. 1 on 27.08.2007 passed the punishment order (Annexure A -3) after accepting the finding recorded by the Inquiry Officer that both the charges levelled against applicant stand proved and imposed punishment of removal from service. This was challenged by the applicant by way of appeal before the Director of Postal Services respondent No. 2 through Appeal memo dated 05.02.2008 Annexure A -9. By the order dated 03.05.2008 the Appellate Authority dismissed the Appeal and maintained the order of the Disciplinary Authority. This was again taken by way of revision dated 22.09.2008 (Annexure A -7) to the Post Master General, respondent No. 3, who by the impugned order dated 06.02.2009 (Annexure A -1) confirmed the finding recorded by both the authorities below.