Rule 31 of GDS Rules 2020
ALL INDIA GRAMIN DAK SEVAKS UNION (AIGDSU)
(Central Head Quarter)
First Floor, Post Office Building, Padamnagar, Delhi 110007
Present:- B.V. Rao
General Secretary: SS Mahadeviaha
Shri, Vineet Pandey jee
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, New Delhi- 110001
Sub: Revision of Schedule of engaging Authority Disciplinary Authority and appellate authority for ABPMs and ABPMs/ Dak Sevaks under Rule 31 of the GDS (conduct & engagement) Rules, 2020 for all categories of Gramin Dak Savaks loss.
Ref:- Your office letter No 17-31/2016-GDS dated 28-07-2020.
A kind reference is invited to our letters of even no dated 04-08-2018 in which we had requested this letter to you because the Changes in the Schedule could not have been made without your approval. We have firm belief that our views will be objectively Considered and the changes would be rescinded schedule as existing previously would be restored:
- We feel that before bringing about such fundamental changes in the schedule this union which the only union recognized should have been consulted and we would have given constrictive suggestions. Unfortunately this did not happen and the administration brought out the changes unilaterally.
- The Hon‘ble Supreme Court of India observed sometime back that discharge/ dismissal from service is a financial capital punishment. We feel that it being so such punishment is to be awarded by a person who has sufficient experience in person management and jurisprudence. you may agree that it is not for no reasons that cases involving theft, dacoity murder and attempt to murder etc are only to be considered by the district and session Jude who is pretty senior and has vast experience in jurisprudence.
- The schedule as existed earlier was more balanced, judicious for the following reason :
- (ii) In case of BPMs only superintends/ divisional heads were empowered to award all penalties including minor punishments Now the power to impose the minor penniless has been vested in the inspectors/ Asst superintends, the inspector are new to the job and have little experience in matters of jurisprudence. The institutional or practical training is hardly enough to give sufficient knowledge and experience. Similarly the Assistant superintendents also do not have much experience in dispensation of justice.
The BPMs, on the other hand have multiple functions to discharge. It is quite natural that some minor genuine and inadvertent mistakes would occur. It officers with little experience are empowered to inflict even minor punishment this that will result in award of several unjustified and improper punishment.
It is all justified thus only the Divisional heads are empowered to consider case involving all punishments including menorahs.
(ii) In case of ABPMs (earlier GDS delivery agents, mail carriers etc including such staff in RMS) the inspectors/ Asst superintendents were empowered only to award minor punishments while Divisional head were empower to award major punishments. Now powers to award all punishments including major ones have been vested in inspector/ Asst inspector’s superintendents.
We have disused in sub-para 3(i) above the qualification of the Asst superintendents To empower such authorities even to award “financial capital punishment” does not meet the balance of justice.
We feel that there is every justification for restoration of the earlier provisions.
4. We are aware that there are scopes of filing the appeal or revision petitions. But this a long process and it becomes too late before justice is done and the mental agony and loss suffered during the period is immeasurable.
5. It would be better to find a prevention than to find a cure which, however, proves to be too costly and tortuous.
We, therefore, request you kindly to look into the matter very purposefully, objectively and dispassionately and restore the powers to award all punishments to divisions heads in case of BPMs, in case of ABPMs the powers to award at least major punishments should remain with the divisional heads ie superintends Sr. superintendents. The appellate authorities may be accordingly redesignated.
With Kind regards,