##PAGE1##

O.A./52/2015

(Reserved on 20.01.2026)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad

Original Application No.52 of 2015

Pronounced on this the 5th Day of February, 2026

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Ashok Kumar Jain son of Late Kunji Lal Jain Posted as Postal Assistant

Orai H.O. (Under Suspension) Resident of Talab Pura, Purani Chungi

Lalitpur U.P.

………..Applicant

By Advocate: Shri Santosh Kumar Kushwaha

Versus

1. Union of India through Secretary, Post and Telegraph) New Delhi.

2. Post Master General, Agra Region, Agra.

3. Director, Post and Telegraph, Department Agra Region, Agra.

4. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices Jhansi Division, Jhansi.

5. Post Master, Head Post Office, Lalitpur.

…Respondents

By Advocate: Shri Vinod Kumar Pandey

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of

the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following

relief:

“i) a suitable order or direction setting aside Order No. F-

4/2/2013-14 dated 28.03.2014 Passed by Respondent No.

4.whereby the applicant has been placed under

suspension (Annexure A-1 to compilation No. 1)

ii) a suitable order or direction setting aside Order No.

F4/2/2013/Ch II date 26.06.2014 (Annexure-A-2 to

compilation No 1) passed by Respondent No. 4.whereby

suspension period of the applicant has been extended for

a further period of 90 days

iii) a suitable order or direction setting aside order No.

F4/2/2013-14/Ch. IV dated 24.09.2014 (Annexure A-3 to

Digitally

MADHU signed by

KUMARI MADHU

KUMARI

Page 1 of 13

O.A./52/2015

compilation No. 1) passed by Respondent No. 4 whereby

suspension period of the applicant has been extended for

a further period of 90 days.

iv) a suitable order or direction in the nature of mandamus

commanding the respondents to forthwith reinstate the

applicant on his post and accord him all consequential

benefits and privileges of the said post to the applicant in

accordance with law.

v) any other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstance of the case.

vi) award cost of this application to the applicant.”

2. Brief facts of this case are that while the applicant was posted as

Postal Assistant Orai HO after transfer from Lalitpur H.O. on

10.03.2014 on administrative grounds, an order was passed by

respondent no.4 dated 28.03.2014 placing him under suspension in

exercise of powers conferred by Sub Rule (1) of Rules 10 of the

Central Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal Rules

1965). The suspension period was extended for a period of 90

days vide order dated 26.06.2014. The applicant received a copy

of the letter dated 07.07.2014 written by Senior Superintendent of

Post Office Jhansi to the Postmaster Lalitpur by which the

applicant came to know that he had been placed under suspension

on account of the fact that he was found involved in

embezzlement of an amount of Rs.2,01,57,900/- due to negligence

on his part. The applicant also submitted a representation before

Director, Postal Services Agra Mangal Agra on 18.06.2014

against the suspension order but to no avail. The applicant has

challenged the suspension order and its extension through this

O.A.

3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the

applicant had been placed under suspension without serving upon

him any charge sheet until very later on 30.04.2015 after about an

year of placing him under suspension. It is argued that the

applicant has been illegally placed under suspension for a very

long time without service of any charge sheet within 90 days and

even the suspension order did not even mention the charges

Digitally

MADHU signed by

KUMARI MADHU

KUMARI

Page 2 of 13

O.A./52/2015

against the applicant. He has further argued that the order of

suspension of the applicant has been extended by the review held

beyond the stipulated period of ninety days. Thus, it was argued

that the suspension of the applicant is illegal and the same should

be quashed.

4