Disciplinary actions require clear allegations with sufficient evidence; vague charges violate principles of natural justice.

ORDER

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

Applicant is aggrieved by the charge memo issued to him under Rule 10B [major penalty] of the Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2020 vide Memo No. F/Misc- Kishoreprasad/2023 dated 22.12.2023 on the allegations that he remained absent unauthorizedly w.e.f. 12.12.2023 to 15.12.2023. Vide letters dated 06.12.2023 and 04.12.2023 it was instructed not to sanction special casual leave or other kind of leave to employees if applied for, during the period of proposed strike/dharna/demonstration and ensure that the willing employees are allowed hindrance-free entries into the office premises. Letters dated 07.12.2023 and 15.12.2023 were addressed to the applicant, which were also communicated through whatsapp group of Daspalla Sub Division, to report to duty immediately failing which action as deemed fit will be initiated against him but he did not care and, disobeying the orders of the superior authority, remained absent unauthorizedly. Had he intimated the IP Daspalla Sub Divison aobut his absence from duty on 12.12.2023, alternative arrangement could have been made for smooth functioning of Kishoreprasad BO on those dates. It is also alleged that the applicant also instigated other GDS employees to participate in strike through different social media and arranged rallies and meetings for the said strike.

2. Instead of going into the nitty-gritty of the matter, suffice it to state that for same and similar charge, many postal employees of different postal divisions filed OA before this Bench in O.A. Nos. 260/00100, 106, 111, 112, 142, 178, 179, 225, 246, 374 and 741 of 2024 and this Bench vide common order dated 17.11.2025 allowed the OAs with the following observations:

“8. We have perused the charges leveled against the applicants. We find that in all the cases the allegations and statement of imputations are almost one and the same. For proper visualization Article of charge enclosed to one of the OAs, i.e. OA No. 741/2024 is extracted hereunder:

ARTICLE-I

That Sri Braja Kishore Mohanta, ABPM, Bholagadia BO in “account with Chitrada S.O presently working as GDSMD/MC Nuagaon Chhotraypur BO in account with Morada SO, while working as such during the period from 20.05.1999 till date was found unauthorised absent from duty w.e.f 12.12.2023. As per APMG(Inv), O/o CPMG, Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar letter No. Inv/30- 11/Misc/2023 dated 04.12.2023, it was instructed not to sanction special casual leave or other kind of leave to employees if applied for, during the period of the proposed strike/Dharna/demonstration and ensure that the willing employees are allowed hindrance-free entries into the office premises. Sri Braja Kishore Mohanta was required to be on duty, but Sri Mohanta did not pay any heed to the communications and continued to remain absent unauthorisedly. He did not submit application for any kind of leave nor any leave was granted to him by the competent authority during the above period. The SPM Morada SO intimated the fact to the ASP l/c, Baripada Central Sub-Division. The ASP Baripada Central Sub- Division has intimated the same to SPOs Mayurbhanj Division through strike report for the period from 12.12.2023 to 15.12.2023.

As such Sri Braja Kishore Mohanta in the capacity of GDSMD/MC Nuagaon Chhotraypur BO has remained unauthorisedly absent and thereby violated Rule-50 of Rules for Branch Offices Eighth Edition corrected up to 28 September, 2007.

Therefore, it is imputed that the said Sri Braja Kishore Mohanta as GDSMD/MC, Nuagaon Chhotraypur BO has failed to maintain devotion to duty and acted in a manner of which is unbecoming of a Sevak, as enjoined in Rule 21 (ii) and (iii) of GDS (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2020.

ARTICLE-II

That Sri Braja Kishore Mohanta, ABPM, Bholagadia B.O in account with Chitrada S.O presently working as GDSMD/MC Nung