CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL COU.AT.TNAoC. 2K6 B0E/N00C2H5, 8C UoTf 2T0A2C5K RCOesReArvMe:d on 17.09.2023 Pronounced on 26.09.2025 THE HON’BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)

THE HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)

Sitam Kumar Panda, aged about 27 years, Son of Kishore Chandra Panda, ABPM (MC) (under Put Off duty since 06.01.2025), Banabulapalli Β.Ο. underMatikholo SO, under Chhatrapur sub-Division, resident At- LaxmiNrusingha Street, 11th Lane, PO/P.S.- Berhampur, Dist.-

Ganjam. Versus ..... Applicant - -

1. Union of India represented through the Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Communications & IT, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, PIN-

110001.

2. The Chief Postmaster Department of Posts, Odisha Circle, PMG Square, Bhubaneswar, Dist.

Khurda, PIN-751001.

3. The Postmaster General, Berhampur Region, PIN-760001. Berhampur, Dist.Ganjam, 4. Sr. Superintendent of Post offices, Berhampur Division, At./P.O.- Berhampur, Dist. Ganjam, PIN-760001.

5. Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, Chhatrapur Sub-Division, At/PO-Chhatrapur, Dist. Ganjam, PIN- 761020.

.....Respondents For the Applicant : Mr. S.K.Ojha, Counsel For the respondents: Mr. D.Sethy, Counsel O R D E R P R A M O D KU MAR DAS, M E MBER (A):

By placing reliance on DGP&T Letter No. 10-2/87-Vig.III dated 19.04.1988, 15.01.1990 and letter No. 294/90-(E) 1 Trg. Dated 26.07.199G0y, adnecai sRioann joafn t hPias tBaesnacnhi dVast eUdO 2I 9&.0 O9.r2s023 in OA No. 403/2023 ( Ajay) aKnudm thaer dCehcaiusidohnu orfy tVhse UHnoino’bnl eo fA Ipnedxi aC &ou Ortr sin the case of , (2015) 2 SCC (L&S) 455, Ld. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that in contemplation of the disciplinary proceedings, the applicant, while working as ABPM (MC) Banabulapalli BO in account with Matikhalo SO under Chatrapur HO, was placed under off duty vide order dated 06.01.2025 whereas chargesheet was issued on 03.04.2025 yet off duty order has been continuing without any review, which is contrary to the aforesaid DGP&T instruction and the law referred to above; more so when the allegation in the charge sheet is not related to committing any fraud by the applicant. It is further case of the applicant that the recruiting authority of the post of ABPM is respondent No.4/Sr. Suptd. of Post Offices and, thus, is competent as per rules to place an ABPM under off duty and in the event an ABPM is placed under off duty by any lower authority the same can be done subject to ratification o the said order of off duty by the competent authority within a period of 15 days, which having not been done in the instant case, the order of put off duty is bad in law. Hence, it is stated that there being no other way out for the applicant, he has filed t“h(ii)s TOoA qpuraasyhi ntgh eth oer dreelri eoffs paust uonfdf edru:t y/suspension issued vide Memo No. PF/ABPM/MC/Banabulapalli BO dated 06.01.2025 (Annex.A/1) holding that the continuation thereof beyond the statutory period is illegal;

(ii) To declare that the continuation of order of Put off duty/Suspension without any review before completion of statutory period is illegal and against the judicial pronouncement;

(iii) To direct the respondents to revoke the order of Put off duty/suspension and allow the applicant to discharge his duty forthwith.

(iv) To direct the Respondents to extend the regular pay and allowances to the applicant from the date of completion of 90 days of put off duty order;

(v) To allow this OA with costs.”

2. By elaborating the allegations made in the charge sheet and the reason of necessitating to put the applicant under off duty, the respondents filed their counter contesting and opposing the stand point taken in the OA as also relief sought. Insofar as the points advanced by the applicant, noted above, based on the counter, Ld. Counsel for the respondents has submitted that the engaging authority in respect of the applicant is ASP, Chatrapur Sub Division/Res. 5 and Res. 4 is the Appellate Authority. Rule 12 of GDS