SC upholds Removal of Gramin Dak Sevak for Proven Misappropriation of Depositors’ Funds

Indraj, appointed as a Gramin Dak Sevak/Branch Post Master in 1998, faced disciplinary action after the 2011 annual inspection uncovered that he had received recurring deposit and insurance premium amounts from depositors but failed to record them in the post office accounts, despite stamping their passbooks. A chargesheet issued in 2013 led to an inquiry in which he was given full opportunity, cross-examined witnesses, and ultimately admitted that he had used the money for household expenses. He later deposited the misappropriated amounts.

The Disciplinary Authority removed him from service, and his statutory appeal and subsequent challenge before the Central Administrative Tribunal were dismissed. The High Court, however, set aside the removal, holding that the admissions were influenced and the punishment unwarranted, prompting the Union of India to appeal.

Issue Before SC: Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence and interfering with the punishment of removal despite a valid inquiry, clear admissions, and proved misappropriation.

SC’s Ruling: The Supreme Court held that the High Court had travelled far beyond the permissible scope of judicial review by reassessing evidence and questioning admissions made during the inquiry. The Court noted that the inquiry was fair, the respondent had full opportunity, defence assistance was provided, witnesses were cross-examined, and the misconduct, misappropriation of public funds, stood conclusively proved through stamped passbooks, missing entries in official records, and the respondent’s own signed explanations. Depositing the embezzled amount later did not absolve the misconduct.

Finding no procedural defect or legal infirmity in the disciplinary process, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and restored the penalty of removal from service.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below