SUSHIL KUMAR PATRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 30.8.2005 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O. A. No. 391 of 2003 dismissing the said O. A. which was filed by the petitioner against the impugned order of termination from service dated 2.7,2003 contained in Annexure -6 to the Writ Petition.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was engaged as a contingent sweeper in Kuchei Sub Post Office. In the year 1993 he had applied to the Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, Baripada Central Sub -Division, Baripada for appointment in the post of GDS/EDA (Extra Departmental Agent). He was provided with an application form which was submitted under the instructions of the ASPOs with the direction to apply through the same by 12.8.2002. Basing on the said application, the petitioner was provisionally selected vide order dated 16.8.2002 and was instructed to undergo training on the date and venue as mentioned in the said order. On completion of training, appointment order was issued in his favour on 22.8.2002 as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent (GDS MD). A letter was also issued to him on the same date directing him to take up residence in village Kuchei as it was a necessary condition for the appointment as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent. He was also directed to join on or before 31.8.2002. After completing all the formalities, he submitted his joining report and started his work accordingly. All of a sudden he got an order of termination from service dated 2.7.2003. Being aggrieved he filed the above mentioned O. A. before the Tribunal.

(3.) THE Tribunal while considering the provisions of Rule 6 of the Extra Departmental Conduct Service Rules which provides the condition to terminate the services of an employee held that before completion of three years of his engagement, a GDS/ED personnel is liable to face a termination on receipt of one month's notice and dismissed the O. A. accordingly. We have perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the Tribunal. We feel that the Tribunal has not considered the relevant Rule in the facts and circumstances of the case which is laid in Clause 3 of Rule 4 of the Postal Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Employment) Rules which provides as under :