Rule 8 permits termination of a GDS with under three years’ service on one month’s notice or pay in lieu.

The respondents notified vacancies for GDS Branch Postmaster posts in Jabalpur Division.

Rajesh Kumar Sen was selected, completed training and verification, and received an appointment effective from 12 September 2014.

On 10 April 2015, his engagement was terminated without a show-cause notice, hearing, or inquiry.

The respondents stated that the recruitment notification had been cancelled because of excess vacancies in the unreserved category and a breach of the 50% reservation ceiling; they also stated that Sen was paid one month’s TRCA plus dearness allowance in lieu of notice.

Sen challenged the termination and sought reinstatement with consequential benefits.

The Tribunal considered Rule 8 of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011, and relied on decisions concerning termination of GDS/Extra Departmental Agent engagements.

Whether the applicant’s engagement, having lasted less than three years, could be terminated under Rule 8 without a disciplinary inquiry or prior hearing.

Whether payment of one month’s allowance in lieu of notice, in the circumstances stated by the respondents, rendered the termination valid.

Rule 8(1)–(2) of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011 provides that the engagement of a Sevak who has not completed three years of continuous service may be terminated by written notice, with one month’s notice required; the proviso permits termination forthwith on payment of the equivalent allowance for the notice period.

The Tribunal also relied on Prabhanshu Tiwari v. Director General & Ors., W.P. No. 8954/2016, in which the Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld termination under the corresponding rules where one month’s salary was paid in lieu of notice and held that the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 did not govern the relevant category of employees.

It additionally referred to Sweety Sen v. Director General & Ors., W.P. No. 12253/2016, as taking a similar view, and quoted Union of India v. Kameshwar Prasad, (1997) 11 SCC 650, concerning the separate rules governing Extra Departmental Agents.

The Tribunal treated the applicant’s engagement as falling within Rule 8 because he had served for less than three years.

It considered the respondents’ payment of one month’s TRCA plus dearness allowance in lieu of notice sufficient under the rule, and relied on the cited High Court decisions to reject the argument that a disciplinary inquiry or the protections under the CCS (CCA) Rules were required in these circumstances.

On that basis, it found the termination consistent with Rule 8, without separately examining in detail the applicant’s challenge to the reservation calculations or cancellation of the recruitment notification.

It dismissed the O.A. and made no order as to costs.