High Court Reinstatement Of Postmaster Quashed; Removal Penalty Upheld By Supreme Court

A bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan heard an appeal by the Union of India challenging the Rajasthan High Court’s order of 2 September 2024 which had set aside a disciplinary removal imposed on a Gramin Dak Sevak/Branch Postmaster and directed his reinstatement. The appeal arose from allegations of misappropriation of public funds discovered during an annual inspection and the ensuing departmental inquiry, appellate proceedings and tribunal adjudication.

The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court judgment and upheld the punishment of removal imposed by the disciplinary authority. The bench held that the High Court had “travelled beyond its jurisdiction” by re-examining the merits of the misconduct—whereas judicial review was confined to the legality of the inquiry process—and that contemporaneous documents and admissions supported the finding of misappropriation. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: Background The respondent was appointed on 12 January 1998 as Gramin Dak Sevak/Branch Postmaster and, during an annual inspection on 16 June 2011, inspectors detected irregularities suggesting misappropriation of recurring deposit and postal life insurance premiums. Two departmental articles of charge alleged that the respondent accepted amounts from depositors and policyholders, stamped passbooks or receipt books, but did not record corresponding entries in the office accounts and kept the money for personal use. A chargesheet issued on 17 December 2013 led to a formal inquiry. The respondent was provided opportunity of hearing, defence assistance, and cross-examined departmental witnesses; he did not lead evidence in defence and in his statement dated 28 April 2012 admitted that the "money received by him from the account holders was spent by him for his household purposes." The inquiry report found the charges proved; the disciplinary authority removed the respondent by order dated 8 December 2014 and the statutory appeal was dismissed on 31 July 2015. The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the Original Application on 23 February 2023. The High Court, however, allowed the writ petition, examined the merits and set aside the penalty, directing reinstatement. The Supreme Court found no infirmity in the inquiry process and held that the High Court had exceeded the scope of judicial review by reopening facts already accepted by the disciplinary authorities and the Tribunal. The Supreme Court therefore allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order and upheld the removal; no interim directions were recorded and no precedent was expressly overruled.

Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO.13183 OF 2025 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.31515 of 2025; Diary No.28631 of 2025) Case Title: Union of India and Ors. v. Indraj Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Not indicated in the judgment For the Respondent(s): Not indicated in the judgment