Chandra Kumar Sarma vs DEPARTMENT OF POSTS on 24 September 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

GUWAHATI BENCH

Original Application No. 286/2026

Date of order: This the 24th Day of September, 2026

HON’BLE MR RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

HON’BLE MS MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Sri Chandra Kumar Sarma,

Aged about 64 years,

S/o Late Ratneswar Sarma,

R/o Village & PO Budrukuchi, Nalbari,

Assam, Pin-781348,

Presently working as GDS BPM,

Budrukuchi BO.

Ph. No. 9864778217,

Email:chandra.kumar.sarma1962@g mail.com.

--Applicant

-vs-

1. The Union of India, represented by

Secretary (Posts),

Ministry

of

Communications,

Government of India, New Delhi –

110001.

2. The Chief Postmaster General,

Assam Circle, Meghdoot Bhawan,

Panbazar, Guwahati, Assam, Pin

781001.

3. Director of Postal Services,

Assam Circle, Meghdoot Bhawan,

Panbazar, Guwahati, Assam,

NENGDEILHEN

SINGSIT

Pin 781001.

4. The Supdt. of Post Offices,

Nalbari-Barpeta Division,

Nalbari, Assam, Pin-781335.

5. The Postmaster (HSG-I),

Nalbari HPO, Nalbari, Assam,

Pin 781335.

6. Sri Mridul Kalita,

Inspector of Posts, Nalbari East Sub

Division, Nalbari, Assam, Pin-781335.

7. Sri Debabrata Bora,

Assistant Superintendent of Posts,

Nalbari West Sub-Division. PIN-781335

---Respondents

Present:

For applicant(s): Sri R. Sarma

Mr. Jyotish Kr. Roy

For respondents:

Sri A. Kundu, Addl. CGSC

ORDER (ORAL)

PER: RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This application has been preferred to seek the following relief:

“8.1 Show cause as to why the Memorandum No.

A1/GDS BPM/Budrukuchi BO dated 27.05.2026, should not be set aside and quashed and quash the entire disciplinary proceedings initiated

and

NENGDEILHEN

SINGSIT

continued thereunder, including the Order dated 29.07.2026 appointing the Inquiring Authority and Presenting Officer; 8.2 Declare that the initiation and continuation of the proceedings, viewed in light of the chronology of adverse administrative action set out in the Facts and Grounds above, is actuated by mala fide and constitutes a colourable exercise of disciplinary power, and quash the same on this ground independently of the ground at 8.1 above; 8.3 Direct the Respondents to show cause as to why the Applicant's entire TRCA has been withheld continuously since December, 2025, without any prior show-cause notice and without any disciplinary proceeding having been initiated at the time such withholding commenced, and without reference to any rule or provision of law authorising such withholding; 8.5. Direct the respondents to pay the TRCA of the applicant regularly till the age of his superannuation.

8.4 Grant to the Applicant such consequential benefits as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit; 8.5 Award costs of the present Application to the Applicant; and 8.6 Pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

NENGDEILHEN

SINGSIT

2.

Applicant was appointed as GDS BРM, Budrukuchi Branch Office, vide Memo No. A/X-46/EDA dated 16.11.2001, in pursuance of approval accorded on compassionate grounds vide Order No. Staff/12-4/2001

dated 03.10.2001, joined on 01.12.2001, and has since continuously and diligently discharged his duties.

He has filed this O.A aggrieved with the impugned Memorandum No. A1/GDS BPM/Budrukuchi BO dated 27.05.2026

issued

by

Respondent

No.

4,

whereby

proceedings have been purportedly initiated against the Applicant under Rule 10-B of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2020.

The grievance of the applicant is that the respondent authority has proceeded for holding the enquiry by appointing the Inquiring Authority and the Presenting Officer and all procedural steps taken in furtherance thereof.

Applicant

has

made

specific

and

contemporaneous objections to the factual foundation of the charges and to the Respondents' persistent failure to

NENGDEILHEN

SINGSIT

furnish the documents relied upon and listed in Annexure III

to the said Memorandum despite repeated written requests.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has submitted representations before the authority and sought for the copies of the documents relied upon by the Disciplinary Authority enlisted in Annexure-III of the Memorandum of Charge but the Disciplinary Authority has deliberately avoided the supply of the actual full documents. Despite three successive written demands dated 12.06.2026, 08.07.2026 and 05.08.2026, not one of these documents has, to date, been furnished to the Applicant in complete or certified form. Hence, the department proceeding deserves to be quashed in limine for non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of Rule 10-C(ii) of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2020, which requires that the statement of allegations, together with the entire evidence relied upon, be

NENGDEILHEN

SINGSIT

communicated to the charged official /Sevak before he can be called upon to answer the charge.

4.

Sri A. Kundu, learned Addl. CGSC enters

appearance on behalf of the respondents on receipt of advance copy.

5.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

6. The short question involved in this case is that departmental enquiry has been initiated against the applicant however he has not been supplied with relevant copies of documents relied upon the respondents.

7. After hearing the parties, without entering into the merit, we dispose of the O.A at the admission stage with a direction upon the respondents/Disciplinary authority to supply all the copies of the documents relied upon by the Disciplinary Authority enlisted in Annexure-III of the Memorandum of Charge before starting the enquiry to enable the applicant to defend the charges levelled against him.

NENGDEILHEN

SINGSIT

8.

Applicant is directed to serve a copy of this O.A.

along with copy of this Order to the respondents within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this