ups_00281 — The Extra Departmental Postal Official, in this case, an Extra Departmental Mail Carrier (EDMC) placed under put-off duty from 24-6-2010 for an alleged misappropriation, should be reinstated granting ex gratia payment as per Rule 12 (3) of Department of Posts, Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Employment) Rules, 2001, amended Rule 2011 for the period of put-off duty and the disciplinary proceeding pending against him should be completed within 4 months from the date of receipt of this order

The Extra Departmental Postal Official, in this case, an Extra Departmental Mail Carrier (EDMC) placed under put-off duty from 24-6-2010 for an alleged misappropriation, should be reinstated granting ex gratia payment as per Rule 12 (3) of Department of Posts, Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Employment) Rules, 2001, amended Rule 2011 for the period of put-off duty and the disciplinary proceeding pending against him should be completed within 4 months from the date of receipt of this order — The chunk provided is a part of a court judgment that orders the reinstatement of an Extra Departmental Mail Carrier who was placed on put-off duty, along with granting ex gratia payment as per Rule ... — Facts: The Applicant herein, was appointed on 10-10-1998 as Extra Departmental Mail Carrier (EDMC) and he joined the post on 12-10-1998 at Ulabari Branch Office, Nalbari against a vacant post. He was put-offduty on 24-6-2010 in contemplation of the departmental proceedings on the alleged ground of non-deposit of money received from the customer. It is noted from the history of the case the money received is over three lakhs. The Applicant states that, he had returned the money. The Respondent states that, the charge-sheet issued to the Applicant could not be served as he is absconding and that also he is not entitled to any ex gratia amount. It is enough if the analysis of the Tribunal is noted in this case. The Applicant was put-off duty by the impugned order, dated 24-6-2010 and no charge-sheet was issued. The deposit amount received totally is ₹ 3,21,455 and no detailed record is produced by the Respondents from which it is noted that the whereabouts of the Applicant could not be traced. The copy of the FIR lodged in 2013 under IPC is not available. The Section 408/420 of IPC based on which the FIR was reported to have filed is for criminal breach of trust of clerk or servant and cheating and dishonesty in delivery of proper respectively. Hence, the submission of the Respondent to the above context is not acceptable in the present case. Rule 12 (3) of Department of Posts, Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Employment) Rules, 2001, amended Rule 2011 states that " a Sevak shall be entitled per month for the period of put-off duty to an amount of compensation as ex gratia payment equal to 25% of his/her Time Related Continuity Allowance together with admissible Dearness Allowance". The Respondents having failed to substantiate absconding of the Applicant, denial of the ex gratia to the Applicant may not be appropriate. Rule 12 (3) of Rules 2001, amended Rule 2011 reads as below:- "

Provided that Sevak who has been absconding or remained absent unauthorizedly and his subsequent put-off duty shall not be entitled to any compensation as ex gratia payment". On the above reading of the case and rules, it was held: