IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6898 of 2006 BIJAY KUMAR son of Late Baikunth Nath Prasad, resident of 34(P) P&T Colony, Radha Rani Sinha Road, Adampur, P.O. Bhagalpur H.O., P.S. Bhagalpur, at present posted as Mail PA (Postal Assistant) City Office, Bhagalpur. Versus 1. The Union of India through the Director of Postal Service, Patna Region, Patna. 2. The Superintendent of Post Office, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur. 3. CAT through its Registrar, Patna Bench, Patna. ----------- For the Petitioner : M/S. Rajiv Ranjan Jha & Manoj Kumar Jha For the Respondents: Mr. Sarvadeo Singh, C.G.C. ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 21st November, 2008. We heard counsel for the petitioner. He would contend that there was no violation of Rule 180 of the Postal Manual Volume VI, Part I by the petitioner and, therefore, punishment order is bad in law. 2. We are not persuaded by his submission as we find that he admitted his fault in discharge of the duties. The charge, thus, stands amply established by his own admission. The Tribunal considered the matter thus : “In the instant case, in view of the fact that the applicant has himself admitted the guilt and the undisputed fact is that he was on duty on 16.8.2001, the applicant cannot be allowed to turn back and say that he did not receive the regd. letters on that date. His - 2 - contention that the distribution chart did not show his duty cannot be sustained in law. It is well settled by now that every body does not work in office according to the work load in the distribution chart. It is not his case that he was not on duty on that date. If it was so, he could have pointed out to his superior authority about this. From the records, we do not find that he has taken any such step and to contend later on that it was not on duty is not plausible.” 3. We find ourselves in agreement with the consideration of the matter by the Tribunal. The writ petition does not deserve to be admitted. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J AMIN/-