1

Brief background Note regarding filing of Criminal Case Number-0/2007, : Ravi

Kumar Poddar versus Santosh Gauriar & others under Section 409,420,467,468,120-B
IPC before the Court of Honble First Class Judicial Magistrate, Indore.

and

In retaliation Shri Gauriar also filed a case in the Honble High Court of Madhya
Pradesh vide M.Cr.C. No. 3579/2009 dated 15.05.2009 under Section 482-Cr.P.C, : Shri
Santosh Gauriar, erstwhile PMG Indore & present CPMG Rajasthan Circle, Shri R. C
Borkhadia, AD(E&BD), Shri A. K Tomar, AD(S) O/o PMG, Indore Region and Shri S.
M Gupta, SPOs Indore Muffassil Dvn. Versus Ravi Kumar Poddar.


* * * * * * * *

1. An RTI activist had requested for information under RTI Act-2005 pertaining to some
construction works, and the requested information/documents were provided to him by the
CPIO & DPS Indore after obtaining approval in File of the then PMG Indore, Shri Santosh
Gauriar. The then PMG Indore, Shri Gauriar had been dealing with Building Branch and
Business Development construction work files directly as Shri R.C Borkhadia, AD(Bldg&
BD) was submitting Files directly to PMG and after joining of Ms Madhuri Dabral as DPS
Indore the same channel of submission of files procedure continued. Thus the then DPS
Indore had not dealt with any of the Files pertaining to floating of tenders or requisition to
Postal Civil Wing regarding award of work etc. But since the PMG gave his written approval
in RTI File therefore all requested documents were provided, thus the then DPS Indore was
not aware that there was anything wrong in the matter.

2. Shri Santosh Gauriar left Indore Region on promotion on 2
nd
June 2007 and joined
Rajasthan Circle. However before leaving Indore, Shri Gauriar had lodged a Police
Complaint vide Letter No.PMG/IND/CONF/GENL/07-08 dated 11 April 2007 on the subject
regarding receipt of threat of physical attack and threat to life of undersigned (Shri Gauriar)
and SSPOs Indore (Ms Shipra Sharma) against subordinate staff about which the then DPS
Indore, Ms Madhuri Dabral came to know much later when a Police Inspector sought her
permission to record statements of lady officials and met her in the Office. The full details are
available in Para-33 and 37(viii) of Letter dated 13.09.2010, dealt in DG Posts File No. 28-
48/2010-SPG. Shri Gauriar had also abruptly cancelled the farewell dinner hosted in his
honour and changed the venue of his departure by train from Ujjain instead of Indore at the
last moment. Shri Gauriar relinquished charge on 02.06.2007 but did not sanction the bills of
contractor despite having adequate time from 1
st
April 2007 to 2
nd
June 2007 i.e. full two
months at his disposal to clear the backlog of pending bills.

3. The irregular Bills of Contractor had been rejected with the approval of Shri B.B
Dave the then PMG Indore. However later on Shri V.C Roy the then DPS Indore sanctioned
these already rejected Bills at a later date. As a result the RTI activist filed a Criminal Case in
Court vide No. 0/2007, filed by Shri Ravi Kumar Poddar under Section 409, 420, 467, 468,
120-B IPC in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Indore against Shri Santosh
Gauriar, Rtd. Member (O) P.S.B. Shri Gauriar had given an evasive reply that, Matters not
relevant here will be replied at an appropriate time later when required. when his comments
were called for on the contents of Ms Madhuri Dabrals Letter dated 13.09.2010, regarding
this criminal case filed against him vide Para-2 of his Letter No. CPMG/MP/ACRs/2010-
2

2011 dated 9
th
December 2010. Shri Gauriar along with Shri R. C Borkhadia, AD(E&BD),
Shri A. K Tomar, AD(S) O/o PMG, Indore Region and Shri S. M Gupta, SPOs Indore
Muffassil had in retaliation filed a case against Shri Ravi Kumar Poddar in the Madhya
Pradesh High Court under Section 482-Cr.P.C,vide M.Cr.C. No. 3579/2009 dated 15.05.2009
which case was also in the knowledge of the senior officers in the Directorate but they chose
to remain silent.

4. After Shri Gauriar relinquished charge of PMG Indore, the Contractors started making
rounds of the Regional Office and it transpired that in the Financial year 2006-07, some
construction work amounting to about Rs. 38,79,724(Thirty Eight Lakh Seventy Nine
thousand seven hundred & twenty four only) was carried out in 5 offices i.e. Gwalior R.S,
Morar, Guna, Mandsaur and Dewas HO as per details below :-

Sl.
No.
Name of
Office
Amount Date on
which work
awarded
Date of
Payment
Name of
Contractor
Date of
Completion
of work as
certified by
Divl. Heads
1 Gwalior R.S
S.O
6,39,359 02.03.2007
&
30.03.2007
03.03.2007
&
30.03.2007
Om
Construction
31.03.2007
2 Morar H.O 7,30,000 02.03.2007
&
30.03.2007
03.03.2007
&
30.03.2007
Om
Construction
31.03.2007
3 Guna H.O 12,84,584 30.03.2007 30.03.2007 Om
Construction
31.03.2007
4 Mandsaur
H.O
4,16,518 30.03.2007 30.03.2007 Om
Construction
28.03.2007
5 Dewas H.O 8,09,263 21.03.2007
&
30.03.2007
22.03.2007,
27.03.2007
&
30.03.2007
Milind
Construction
31.03.2007

TOTAL

38,79,724


(Thirty Eight Lakh Seventy Nine thousand seven
hundred & twenty four only)

(a). The modus operandi was such that it is very difficult to arrive at the exact figures
because the expenditure was split in small portions and the expenditure was directly booked
in multiple offices i.e. some Bills in Divisional Office, some in the respective Head Post
Offices and a few in the Regional Office and Sr. Postmaster Indore issued cheques directly in
some cases and in many cases the sanction Memos were not endorsed to DDO and to keep up
appearance only a few Bills were booked in Regional Office and routed through the RIFA &
DDO. Thus a web of confusion was created by splitting of Bills, splitting of expenditure,
splitting of records in order to avoid centralized monitoring and a clear picture to emerge. As
a result the above cited amount of Rs. 38,79,724 (Thirty Eight Lakh Seventy Nine
thousand seven hundred & twenty four only) is not the final figure and if proper check is
carried out in the various offices the Amount/figure will likely increase further.

(b). This is not a simple case of non-adherence to rules and procedures, but it is a case in
which the Contractors have submitted Bills for higher amount whereas work commensurate
3

with the amount claimed has not been performed by them. Moreover to make matters worse
the Contractors were not issued list/details of items to be executed and no work orders were
issued and work was performed on verbal orders. Even later on no efforts were made to bring
on record and write the same in file for future reference and record purpose. Work Orders
were not issued intentionally to avoid verification at a later date, thus reducing chances of
getting caught. For example if the Bill submitted was for Rs. 10 Lakhs by the contractor then
the work actually performed was for a fraction of this amount i.e. just Rs. 2-3 Lakhs. Since
no work orders had been issued thus it became difficult to verify the work actually done.
Moreover due to splitting of works these Contractors took advantage and added to the
confusion by submitting numerous Bills for petty amounts as small as Rs. 20,000/- for
purchase of construction related material etc which were difficult to verify and thus there was
no other option but to go by the say of the Contractor who had the final word.

(c). The Honble Supreme Court bench of Mr Justice B.N Kirpal, Mr Justice
Doraiswamy Raju and Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat, in its judgement dated 18
th
February
2002, upheld a Tribunal decision allowing UCO Bank to remove one of its employees
from service. It was contended by the bank that the employee, Hardev Singh, had
illegally kept with him Rs. 864 by rounding off the fixed deposit amount and
surrendered the same to the bank only after he was caught in the act. The Supreme
Court held that even minor embezzlements by bank employees would warrant their
dismissal from service as banks are regarded as the custodians of public savings. In
similar manner as per Rule-204-A of Postal Manual Volume-III under subheading
Responsibility, every public officer should exert the same vigilance in respect of public
expenditure and public funds generally as a person of ordinary prudence would exercise
in respect of the expenditure and the custody of his own money. . personal liability
must be strictly enforced against all officers who are dishonest, careless or negligent in
the duties entrusted to them.

5. The following rules were flouted :-

(i). Rule 129 of GFR (1) No works shall be commenced or liability incurred in
connection with it until (iv). estimates containing the detailed specifications and quantities
of various items have been prepared on the basis of the Schedule of Rates maintained by
CPWD or other Public Works organizations and sanctioned; (vi). tenders invited and
processed in accordance with rules; (vii). a Work Order issued.

(ii). Rule 130 of GFR For purpose of approval and sanctions, a group of works which
forms one project, shall be considered as one work.

(iii) There is no provision of executing the civil wok under the supervision of a committee.
A committee can be appointed for purchase of goods costing above Rs.15,000/- (Rupees
Fifteen Thousand) only and up to Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh) only on each occasion
under Rule 146 of GFR.

(iv) In all the cases splitting of bills has been allowed which is against Rule 148 of GFR
2005.

(v) The tender rates in question on the basis of which proposals in respect of Dewas HO
Financial Mart had been called for and approved, were not valid. The work was therefore
irregularly ordered and carried out on the basis of a single quotation which is in violation of
4

Rule 132 (v) of GFR2005, Rule 132 (v) limited tenders will be called for works costing less
than Rupees five lakhs;

(vi) The files were not routed through proper channel and were submitted to the PMG
directly violating the provisions of O&M. Two levels i.e. PMG and DPS have been provided
in the Regional Office so that there is objectivity in decision making and continuity. Since the
DPS is the CPIO of Regional Office in case of RTI applications, thus the DPS cannot be kept
out from handling Building Construction files as all such Files come under the public domain
as per RTI Act-2005. Moreover as per the Manual of Office Procedure, Chapter-VI, Action
on Receipts Para-27 regarding level of disposal and channels of submissions it lays down
vide sub Para (9) Wherever level jumping is done in respect of any category of cases, each
such case on its return, will pass through all the levels jumped over who in suitable cases
could resubmit the cases for reconsideration. One illustrative example of an Officer who was
placed under suspension and CBI FIR lodged against her as she bypassed office hierarchy
due to ulterior motive is cited as under:-

(a). Smt Ranju Prasad, the then SSPOs Chandigarh (01.03.1993 to 24.12.1996) who also
worked as PMG(R) Punjab from 11.02.2010 to 26.02.2014 had been placed under suspension
and CBI FIR No. 13 dated 01.03.1996, had been lodged against her by the CBI as Principle
Offender being accused number one under Section 120-B r/w 420,467,468, 471 of the
Indian Penal code and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988. Smt R.
Prasad, Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Chandigarh Division was accused number-1
and the Dealing Assistant who faithfully carried out her orders as accused No-2. In the FIR it
has been stated that Smt R. Prasad while posted and functioning as Senior Superintendent of
Post Offices, Chandigarh Division had entered into a criminal conspiracy with the object to
cheat and defraud the Department of Posts. The Office Assistant prepared fake sanction
orders due towards the legal charges, booking of Lajpat Rai Bhawan etc. The files were
being submitted directly by the Office Assistant to Smt R. Prasad, who was intentionally
bypassing the laid down departmental hierarchical structure in the Divisional Offices
and she passed the sanction orders for payment knowing that the payments were not
due to them as there was nothing on record. As per rules the sanction orders should be
routed through the Assistant Superintendent of Post offices who is supposed to put up
these sanctions in file after giving details of the cases/judgments against which the
payments are to be made. However Smt R. Prasad, passed the fake sanction orders
directly in connivance with the Office Assistant who was carrying out her instructions.
The sanctions were passed for payment even without the fee bills of the standing counsel
and knowing fully well that such sanctions were fake as these were not supported by
any fee bill of the counsel etc.

6. The following irregularities were noticed :-

(i). The Tender Opening Committee comprised of Shri R.C Borkhadia, AD(Estt&BD),
Shri R. Surendra, RIFA and Shri S.M Acharya, A.E Postal Civil Wing. Thereafter none of the
Files regarding issue of sanction memos, payment orders etc. were referred to RIFA and the
construction work by approved Contractors was not seen or supervised by the A.E Postal
Civil Wing. In some cases the rates of Om Construction had been approved being lowest
Tenderer, but work was got done through Milind Construction.

(ii). Despite allotting work of Finance Mart to Om Construction in Ratlam SO, no work
was carried out by the Contractor and there was no penalty clause.
5


(iii). Dewas HO work had also been allotted to Om Construction as per Tender. However
the work of Dewas was allotted to Milind Construction even before opening of Tenders.
Milind Construction had been allotted work in the year 2005-06 for getting work done in
Ujjain HO, Jabalpur HO, Lashkar HO, Indore Nagar HO, Indore GPO. Thus Milind
Construction carried out the work of Dewas HO at the old Tender Rates of the year 2005-06
which were higher than the new Tender Rates of 2006-07. Since the work had already been
allotted to Milind Construction even before the Tender for the year 2006-07 was opened,
therefore after tender opening it was observed that the Rates quoted by Om Construction was
lower than Milind Construction for the year 2006-07. Therefore at a later date the Regional
Office had to ask Milind Construction to deposit the excess amount of Rs. 72,344/-. Om
Construction had also during various visits to R.O questioned that as per Tender opening the
work of Dewas HO was allotted to him so how the work has been got done at higher rate
from Milind Construction. As a result of such verbal objections of Om Construction the
excess amount was later on got credited from Milind Construction.

(iv). The payment to the Contractors was made directly by the Head Postmasters and
Regional Office issued Letters directly in some cases to the Postmasters of Head Post Offices
and in some other cases to the Divisional Heads. None of the payment Orders were endorsed
to Regional IFA and DDO(Drawing & Disbursing Officer). The RIFA, Shri R. Surendra had
come on transfer from Hyderabad & had good knowledge of rules & was insistent upon
following the rules. He had strongly objected in RO File No. BDC/2-27/06-07/II about the
irregular practice of the AD (BD/Estt) R.O of issuing sanction Memos directly to the Sr.
Postmaster, Indore without the knowledge of the Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO)
and no sanction is being marked to the DDO for making payment for which one cashier
is attached to RO with special pay.

(v). In File No. BDC/2-27/06-07/II, the AD (BD) vide letter No. BDC/2-27/06-07/II dated
8.5.07 placed at 239/C desired that the AO IFA& the AE (Civil) verify the Finance Mart
work at 5 Post Offices including Gwalior and Guna Divisions. The A.E. (Civil) refused to
attend Gwalior Division on 11.05.07 and vide his letter No. W (31)/AE/PC/IND dated
09.05.07 (240/C) intimated that he was not informed about execution of work of Finance
Mart in various Post Offices. Now after completion of work it is very difficult to verify
the work and requested to consult his higher authorities for verification of the works.
Thus these two Officers i.e. the RIFA and the AE (Civil) Indore had refused to become a
party to all such irregularities.

(vi). The Regional Office gave permission for incurring expenditure and getting the Civil
Works done on 21
st
March 2007 (Gwalior & Indore Muffassil Dvn), 26
th
March2007
(Mandsaur Dvn.) and 27
th
March 2007 (Guna Dvn.). As per R.O. letter No.BDC/2-
27/Supll./06-07 dated 11.6.2007, all the Divisional Heads were asked to give completion
certificates. All the Divisional Heads gave a certificate of completion in the Month of June
2007 that the work was completed on 31
st
March 2007. This contention was not believable
as work of Civil construction takes time and cannot be completed within three to seven days.
As no work Order had been issued to the Contractor therefore there was no other option but
to reject the Bills.

(vii). In the past the civil work was being got done through the Civil Wing. For
example the Civil Wing had also submitted its detailed estimates for an amount of
Rs.14,175 (67/C of File No.BL-02/4) (Rs. Fourteen thousand one hundred & seventy
6

five) for laying of vitrified tiles of IQ at Morar HO. Thus it is clear that when such a
small item of work of Rupees fourteen thousand can be given to Civil Wing then why
there has been splitting of bills for single items of work for Rupees Seven Lakh Thirty
Thousand at Morar HO. (Please also refer to Para 7(iii)(d) of this report.) The work done
by Contractor was of very poor quality and it was impossible to verify it because there was
no work order citing details of items of work to be carried out. The Department is
maintaining a separate Specialized Agency like the Civil Wing which should be the final
word in all technical matters pertaining to building construction, repairs etc. The Department
is incurring huge expenditure on maintaining the Postal Civil Wing thus it is imperative that
its services are utilized fully and the time and energy of the Postal staff is not diverted
towards such extraneous activities which can easily be carried out by the specialized Agency.
The Civil Wing has never given its refusal in writing that it cannot or does not want to carry
out the Civil works given to it by the Postal Administration. Thus there was no urgency that
the work was given to a private contractor without even bothering to float tenders & follow
proper procedure.

(viii). During the Annual Inspection of Guna Division from 07-12-2007 to 08-12-2007
carried out by the then DPS Indore, Ms. Madhuri Dabral it has been observed vide Para 22.4
and 23.2 as under:-

22.4 It is felt that the work pertaining to Annual Repair and Maintenance as well as any
additions alterations work and Modernization of Buildings should be carried out by the Civil
Wing. A lot of time and attention of Divisional Heads is diverted towards getting work done
which can easily be executed by the Civil Wing. The Divisional Heads should concentrate on
their core activities i.e. administration and management and smooth running of Postal
Operations as well as achieving targets allotted under various categories. In future no local
level Building maintenance work will be carried out by the Divisional Head for an amount
exceeding Rs. 10,000/-. Divisional Heads will only carry out work of petty nature below Rs.
10,000/- only.

23.2 I was informed that some construction activity had been taken up on first floor of
Guna HPO for construction of additional space where the Divisional Office could be located.
I have seen the construction which has been left midway and Electrical fittings and other
items of work are yet not completed. Since the work has not been got done through the Civil
Wing and as the local staff, Divisional Head etc have washed their hands off the whole matter
and want that the entire responsibility to be taken up by the Regional Office on the pretext
that it was initiated by the RO.

7. The following action was taken :-

(i). No work Order was available in File nor could the Contractors provide copy of work
order, thus the exact nature of work to be carried out was not known and hence Bills could
not be verified. Since no work order had been issued for the construction works therefore the
Superintendent Engineer, Ahmadabad was requested to carry out on the spot verification of
work so that bills for at least that portion of work can be sanctioned which had been actually
carried out. But the Superintendent Engineer had vide his Letter dated 13.11.2007 cited
numerous shortcomings, The nature of Civil works executed under supervision of the
Postal authorities in the financial year 2006-07 is such that the quality of works i.e.
specification of materials used, workmanship along with stages of execution cannot be
verified by the civil wing at this stage. In the quotation, submitted by the contractor, the
7

description of items executed are not in detail. The specification of works to be followed
are not defined, mode of payment is also not defined. It is therefore advised, to avoid
such complications, civil works may please be got done through civil wing in proper
manner throughout the year i.e. all works should not be asked to carry out at the end of
financial year, to avoid surrender of funds. It is surprise to note that the estimates
submitted by this office, Executive Engineers office & Assistant Engineers office are not
being approved & works are got done at your end.

(ii). One investigation was carried out by Shri S.M Pingle, Assistant Director (Estt & BD)
dated 19.02.2008 and Shri P.R. Deshmukh, Assistant Director (Staff & Vigilance) carried out
two investigations and submitted Inquiry Report dated 11.03.2008 and 13.03.2008. In the
Inquiry Reports of both of these officers, regarding construction work by these two
Contractors a large number of irregularities had been pointed out.

(iii). The Chief PMG, MP Circle then referred concerned Files of Regional Office, Indore
to the Director of Accounts, Shri Satish Kumar. The three page Report of DAP had been duly
forwarded to Circle Office Bhopal vide DAP Letter No. Vig./12-6/2007/717 dated
11.02.2008. The list of irregularities cited by DAP in his Report are briefly given as under :-

(a). as per rule 126(3) read with rule 123 of GF rules 2005 all original work costing upto
Rs.10 lacs are required to be assigned by the Deptts. to the civil division/public works
organization as defined in rule 126(2) ibid. It did not happen in this case.

(b). the job was not assigned to Civil Wing.

(c). According to Rule 126(1) GF rules 2005, such maint. repair works estimated to cost
Rs. 10 lacs can be undertaken directly by the Deptt. without assigning the civil/public
works Deptt. subject to formalities to be observed under rule 132 ibid. Rule 132
provides for limited tenders for the maintenance work for the amount less than Rs. 05
lacs. Further, it provides for the personal certificate of the officer-in-charge of
execution of work (here, Divisional Heads) in the following format as prescribed under
sub Para (vii) of the said rule-
Executing officer of (Name of the work) am personally satisfied that the work has been
executed as per the specifications laid down in the contract agreement and the
workmanship is upto the standards followed in the Industry.
On examination of the cases in hand, it is found that the prescribed certificates are still
wanting in all of them which should be insisted upon.

(d). Further, we have not been provided with file no. Tech mod/2-1/06-07-Morar and other
related files in which the PMG accorded approval for the jobs undertaken otherwise, we
could know something more in the matter.

(e). III(b) of IR Bills verified placed at P/30/C of the aforesaid file. Amts. Dont tally.
One bill is for Rs. 801935/- and another is for Rs. 20811 Total Rs. 322746/-.

(f). (iv) Civil work is to be dealt with in accordance with provisions contained in Rule
126, Rule 129 and Rule 132 of GF Rules 2005.

(iv). As per Member (Finance) P&T Bd. Letter No. 16-64/69-B dated 27.2.1970, Full
responsibility for a decision taken in exercise of the delegated Financial powers rest on
8

the Head of Circle or Directors whether such a decision is taken in accordance with the
advise of the IFA or by over ruling him. Where the advise of the IFA is over-ruled, it
should be done by a written order recording reasons.

(v). The Chief PMG, MP Circle got three Circle level Committees set up to enquire into
the matter. The Circle Office set up two committees vide CO Memo No. VIG/12-6/2007
dated 26.11.2007 (First Committee) and CO Memo No. VIG/12-6/2007 dated 27.2.2008
(Second Committee). But these two committees never submitted any report despite issue of
R.O Letter No. Vig./01/Misc/08, dated 24
th
April 2008, subject regarding maintenance Work
of Guna HO, Morar HO and Mandsaur HO. Thereafter, as per CO Memo No. AD
(BLDG)/FM/2007-2008 dated 13.03.2008 a Third Committee was formed. This Committee
had submitted only one report dated 25.03.2008. This four Member Committee comprising of
Shri D.C Bhavsar, AD(Building) Circle Office, Bhopal, Shri R. K Shrivastava, Asstt. Chief
Accounts Officer of DAP Office, and Shri Brajendra Kumar, Assistant Engineer Postal Civil
Division, Bhopal, along with concerned Divisional Head had as per their Report clearly
stated the flouting of rules and inability to verify the quality of work, specifications of work
/material used and workmanship etc because in the bills description of items has not been
explained and given in half or single line, the rates are also more than DSR Rates.

(vi). The P&T Audit vide their Letter No. O.A.D/IR/PMG IND/07-08/194 dated
26.04.2007 forwarded the Audit inspection Report of the O/o PMG Indore conducted from
03.04.2007 to 13.04.2007. As per Para-7 it was recorded as under :-

7. Unauthorized expenditure worth Rs.9.10 Lakh on execution of work on quotation basis.

According to GFR 2006 Rule 145 purchase/work up to Rs.15000/- can be done on
Single Quotation basis and rule No. 146 ibid purchase/works up to Rs.100000/- can be done
through formation of local committee.

On scrutiny of purchasing file and other associates records it was noticed that
purchasing/execution of work has been carried out by splitting Single Quotation basis or
formation of local committee to avoid obtaining the prior approval of higher authorities total
expenditure worth Rs.9,10,751/- as detailed in Annexure-III was incurred on said purchasing.

Civil work also executed at various post offices even though the postal civil wing is available
with the department. Execution of civil work without getting consultation with specialized
agency was also not in order, civil work also got splitted on the basis of sub office or on one
office itself. Reasons of the same may be intimated.

The stated figure indicate that the purchasing/execution of work was beyond the GFR
145 and 146 for which open tender was essential, further most of expenditure was incurred on
closing of year to exhaust the available funds in which rules and instructions were not
followed and expenditure incurred in splitting the expenditure. Reasons of the same may be
intimated.

In reply it was stated that the expenditure was as per rule and construction work has been
carried out at Gwalior R.K Puri Sub office through forming of local purchase committee and
on its recommendation, all other purchasing were approved well in time. The reply was not
acceptable, all the expenditure of similar nature may be merged together and combined
approval of competent authority may be obtain for regularization of expenditure as
9

expenditure was beyond the limit fixed for Quotation/ and committee.

Shri Gauriar relinquished charge on 02.06.2007 and the draft Audit Inspection carried
out from 03.04.2007 to 13.04.2007 had been shown to him before issue but he was unable to
seize the opportunity and convince the Audit to drop the Para at draft stage itself.

8. Since the matter was got enquired into by officers of Circle Office, Postal Civil Wing
as well as Regional Office and these Bills of contractors were not found justified therefore
file was submitted to Shri B.B Dave (IPoS-1986), who had joined as PMG Indore on 17.4.08
and these bogus bills of contractors were rejected by the PMG Indore. The charge of DPS
Indore was relinquished by Ms. Madhuri Dabral, on 08.05.2008. However soon after Shri
B.B Dave was also transferred and relinquished charge on 29.08.2008 after just 3-4 months in
office. Thereafter Smt Indu Gupta (IPoS-1979) joined as PMG Indore and Shri V.C Roy
(IPoS-1992) the then DPS Indore Region sanctioned these already rejected Bills. In the
meanwhile the RTI activist had filed a criminal case in the Court based on information
provided under RTI Act on the ground that already rejected bills of contractor had been
sanctioned irregularly despite work not being carried out by the Contractors causing loss to
the Government.

9. Thereafter to justify their wrong action of sanctioning the irregular Bills of contractor
which went against the interests of the Department, Shri V.C Roy took following steps :-

(i). Shri V.C Roy the then DPS Indore then indulged in unethical practice of creation of
false evidence at a later date i.e. one letter dated 04.05.2009 of Shri S.M Pingle the then
A.D(Bldg) with reference to RO Indore Letter No. DPS/CON/2009 dated 04.05.2009 which
was part of a larger conspiracy and had been created at a later date at the behest of Shri
Santosh Gauriar in order to implicate Ms. Madhuri Dabral. The Letter is reproduced below:-

To,

The Postmaster General,
Indore Region-432001.

Sub: Inquiry in the case of Finance Mart at Dewas HO.

Reference: R.O Indore Letter No. DPS/CON/2009 dated 04.05.2009

Respected Maam,

Queries of Honble PMG regarding visit to decide taking technical/financial expert assistance
and scope of inquiry, I have to mention following facts,

On receipt of some bills from the SPOs Mfl. Dn. Indore, I had examined all the case files
and observed that no any written approval was given by the RO for execution of some of
the works at Finance Mart at Dewas. I submitted my report to the then DPS Ms. Madhuri
Dabral. She did not accept my report and she herself prepared an Inquiry Report, called me in
her chamber and asked to sign the report she prepared in an abusive words. I refused to sign
and immediately proceeded to Bhopal to apprise of the matter to CPMG.

Mrs. Madhu Narayanan, the then CPMG was told of the matter verbally. She assured me that
10

even if I sign the report the entire case would be investigated into on Circle Level and only
then proper decision would be taken. On this assurance from her I came back to Indore and
when again the then DPS forced me to sign the report, I signed it under duress as I knew that
the CO would be making detail inquiry into the matter. Though I signed it I was not given any
opportunity to go through the report.

In view of the above facts, I have to mention that I did not visit the site, did not make any
technical or financial assistance as the report was not prepared by me. The scope of inquiry
was not known to me.
Yours faithfully,
-Sd-
(S.M Pingle)
Dated at Indore Asstt. Director (Estt. & BD)
4
th
May 2009 R.O Indore

(ii). It is felt that the very fact that Shri S.M Pingle brought this matter on record after such
a long gap of one year two months after submission of inquiry report, as his report is dated
19.02.2008, it is evident it was an afterthought & this letter dated 04.05.2009 had been
written under duress as Shri S.M Pingle retired on 30.06.2009 & had just 01 month left for
retirement & therefore succumbed to the pressure tactics of Shri V.C Roy, the thenDPS
Indore, who acted at the behest of Shri Santosh Gauriar. Thus Shri V.C Roy, has gone to the
extreme extent of building false evidence at a later date in violation of Section 209 of the
Indian Penal Code i.e. fraudulently or dishonestly, or with intent to injure or annoy any
person, makes in a Court of Justice any claim which he knows to be false.

(iii). Shri Gauriar made all out efforts to make this Criminal case filed by a private party
against him, appear as if the Department was defending his case whereas the State was not a
party in this case. In a way his presumption was also correct, because he enjoyed massive
support as almost all the officers were supporting him. Thus Shri Gauriar orchestrated the 39
page reply dated 16.09.2009 signed by Shri S.R Meena and filed by him in his capacity as
PMG Indore which included the Letter dated 4
th
May 2009 vide which Shri Pingle had
disowned his own Inquiry Report dated 19
th
February 2008. Since Shri P.R. Deshmukh,
Assistant Director (Staff & Vigilance) had expired by this time therefore the two Inquiry
Reports submitted by him dated 11
th
March 2008 and 13
th
March 2008 were clandestinely
brushed aside. Thus Shri Gauriar wanted to prove that the Department has given him a clean
chit as he has got two promotions from 2007 to 2012 and hence no irregularity has been
committed by Shri Gauriar. It is not understood how and why then PMG Indore, Shri S.R
Meena had filed an official reply on behalf of the Department, in support of such willful
creation of false evidence and then surreptitiously included it in the reply filed on behalf of
the department in a case in which the State was not a party.

10. In the 39 page reply filed by Shri S.R Meena then PMG Indore on 16.9.2009 incorrect
and wrong facts were submitted before the Court. A brief analysis of his reply is as under :-

ANALYSIS OF SHRI S.R MEENA, PMG INDORE LETTER DATED 16.09.2009

Sl.
No.
Reference Brief Analysis
1 Letter dated
16.09.2009 of Shri S.R
(a). Content - Covering Letter.
(b). Shri Gauriar made all out efforts to mislead the Honble Court &
11

Meena, then PMG
Indore addressed to
Honble Judicial
Magistrate, First Class,
Indore.


Page - 1
make this Criminal case filed by a private party against him, appear as
if the Department was defending his case whereas the State was not a
party in this case. Thus Shri Gauriar through active connivance of Shri
S.R Meena, orchestrated the 39 page reply dated 16.09.2009 filed by
PMG Indore. Shri S.R Meena then PMG Indore had filed an official
reply on behalf of the Department in support of such willful creation of
false evidence and then surreptitiously included it in the reply filed on
behalf of the department in a case in which the State was not a party.
Thus Shri S.R Meena has fabricated evidence at a later date.
Action under Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code needs to be
taken against these officers i.e. fraudulently or dishonestly, or with
intent to injure or annoy any person, makes in a Court of J ustice any
claim which he knows to be false.
2 Annexure-I List of
records & documents
produced before the
Honble Court


Pages - 2
(a). Content - List of 6 (six) files & Inquiry Report of Committee
constituted by CPMG, Inquiry Report of Shri S.M Pingle, P&T Audit
Report for period from 03.04.2007 to 13.04.2007.
(b). The two investigation Reports dated 11.03.2008 and 13.03.2008
submitted by Shri P.R. Deshmukh, Assistant Director (Staff &
Vigilance) have not been mentioned.
(i). One investigation was carried out by Shri S.M Pingle, Assistant
Director (Estt & BD) and submitted his Inquiry Report dated
19.02.2008.
(ii). Two investigations were carried out by Shri P.R. Deshmukh,
Assistant Director (Staff & Vigilance) and submitted two Inquiry
Reports dated 11.03.2008 and 13.03.2008.
(iii). The Chief PMG, MP Circle got three Circle level Committees
set up to enquire into the matter. But the two committees set up vide
Memo dated 26.11.2007 and 27.2.2008 never submitted any report.
Only the Third Committee set up vide Memo dated 13.03.2008
submitted only one report dated 25.03.2008. The details have been
given in Para-11, Page-18 below.
3 Annexure-II
Summary Note
September 2009.

Pages 3-4
(a). Content Comprises of six Paras
(b). Para-1 - The Prime Ministers Office never directed that rules need
not be followed.
Para-2 The PMGs Financial Powers have not been questioned. The
Rules flouted have been listed in Para-5 of this Report.
Para-3 As regards floating of Tenders The irregularities have been
given in Para-6 of this Report.
Para-4 - The post of PMG Indore was vacant from 02.06.2007 to
16.4.2008 i.e. for about 11 months, & CPMG was holding dual charge
of Regional Office. Therefore all the case Files were sent to CPMG
MP Circle Ms. Madhu Narayanan for granting approval in the
respective Files of Regional Office. But the Files were returned by
CPMG to Regional Office without approval. It was later on that
separate Letter No. VIG/12-6/2007 dated 29.4.2008 issued under
signature of Shri G.R Dhote, APMG(Staff&Vig.) conveying approval
were received without Photocopy of Notesheet of File in which
approval of CPMG had been obtained nor was the copy of CIFA
Report or remarks of CIFA in File. In the meanwhile Shri B B Dave
who was working as DPS(HQ) from 05.09.2006 to 16.4.2008 in
Bhopal under Smt Madhu Narayanan was promoted and posted as
PMG Indore & joined on 17.4.2008. Shri B B Dave, PMG Indore
Region was aware of the background of Shri Dhotes Letter dated
29.4.2008 but gave orders for rejection of irregular Bills of
Contractors. On perusal of CIFA Report it is observed that CIFA in his
12

report dated 11.02.2008 has cited large number of irregularities as
mentioned in Para-7(iii) of this Report & has not given remarks
anywhere in the Report that irregular Bills may be sanctioned or
advised for release of payments.
Para-5 Shri V.C Roy had obtained Letter dated 4
th
May 2009 from
Shri S.M Pingle then AD(Bldg/BD) disowning his own Inquiry Report
dated 19.02.2008. The details have been given in Para-9 of this Report.
Para-6 - The P&T Audit has cited irregularities in detail vide Para-7 of
Audit inspection Report dated 26.04.2007 as mentioned in Para-7(vi)
of this Report.
4 Annexure-III
Detailed Note
September 2009.

Pages 5-8
(a). Content This Annexure comprises of Five (5) points.
(b). Point-1 All ARMO & petty Civil works are to be got done
through Postal Civil Wing. As per details at Para-6(vii) of this Report
the Civil Wing has carried out petty works of even Rs.14,175 in IQ at
Morar HO. The Committee comprising of Sub Divisional Inspector,
Head Postmaster, Public Relations Inspector, Marketing Executive &
APM is a very junior level Committee comprising of Non-Gazetted
Staff & not covered under the rules. As per DG Posts Letter No.48-
1/03/Tech dated 22.10.2003, the Directorate had issued guidelines that
in every Circle/Region a three Member Committee will be formed
comprising of DPS, Divisional Head and A.E (Civil) who will submit
joint report after visiting the concerned Post offices selected by
Circle/Region for modernization. The CPMG had not granted any
approval in the respective Files of Regional Office. Shri B.B Dave was
fully aware of the doubtful background for issuing the Circle Office
Letter No. VIG/12-6/2007 dated 29.4.2008 and 19.5.2008 and rejected
the Bills.
Point-2 It is wrong to presume that Postal Civil Wing was facing
acute shortage of staff. The Civil Wing floats Tenders & moniters
work. Being technical wing on civil works it is fully competent & has
the required expertise & domain knowledge. The Civil Wing exists so
that attention of Operative Staff is not diverted towards such works, as
they need to focus on core activities of Postal operations.
Point-3 The Letter dated 4.10.2006 (page-37) has been cited as Work
Orders for carrying out civil works in Dewas HO, which cannot be
termed as Work Order as the Civil Wing Work Orders contain exact
measurements, DSR Rates & Quality specifications along with Penalty
clause on Contractor & other terms & conditions. There is a difference
between Work Orders & Administrative Orders & the two should not
be confused. This is nothing but to create confusion & divert attention
from main issue. It has further been alleged that Ms. Madhuri Dabral
harbored ill will & forced Shri S.M Pingle to sign his Inquiry report
dated 19.02.2008. He has enclosed as proof The Statement dated
04.05.2009 was obtained under pressure by Shri V.C Roy, after one
year two months from submission of Inquiry Report & just 01 month
before retirement of Shri Pingle. The details are available in Para-9 of
this Report. The so called report to this effect purported to have been
made to DG Department of Posts, New Delhi, has not been seen by
Ms. Madhuri Dabral and the DG Posts has not called for any comments
nor has anyone asked the officer to respond in this matter. Thus it is
presumed this fabricated false report has been closed & filed by DG
Posts as such flimsy and baseless reports do not warrant even the
action of calling for comments/report of the officer
Point-4 The details of irregularities have been given in Para-4,5,6 &
7 of this Report.
13

Point-5 The details of irregularities pointed out by P&T Audit have
been given in Para-7(vi) of this Report. Details of petty items of
purchase have been cited to divert attention from core issue.
5 PMO ID Note No.
170/31/C/4/2005-ES I
dated 6.12.05.

Pages - 9
(a). Content - Letter from Prime Ministers Office addressed to
Secretary(Posts). It has no relevance to the irregular Bills of
Contractors which were rejected but later on got sanctioned illegally to
favor the Contractors & cause loss to Govt.
(b). Prime Ministers Office has not given any directions not to follow
rules. PMG Indore is trying to intimidate by names dropping of highest
authority.
6 Extract of Schedule
II

Pages - 10
(a). Content Contains List of Posts categorized as Head of
Department.
(b). Reference has no relevance to the case. The powers of Head of
Department have not been questioned. It is non following of correct
procedures & irregularities in charging Bills for work not carried out,
causing loss to Govt.
7 Extract of General
Financial Rules

Pages - 11
(a). Content - Rule 129(2), Rule 146 have been cited.
(b). These rules are not relevant or applicable & have been cited to
divert attention. These rules are not applicable for Civil Construction
work but for petty day to day office purchases. There is no provision of
executing the civil wok under the supervision of a committee. A
committee can be appointed for purchase of goods costing above
Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) only and up to Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One lakh) only on each occasion under Rule 146 of GFR.
8 Letter No. Vig./12-
6/2007/717 dated
11.2.2008 from Shri
R.K Shrivastava,
ACAO, o/o DAP,
Bhopal.

Pages 12-15
(a). Content - Enclosed 3(three) page Report of Director of Accounts
Postal.
(b). In the Postal Circles the O/o Director of Accounts (DAP) reports to
the Chief PMG. DAP looks after all accounting matters of all offices in
the Circle. The DAP also discharges functions of Circle Internal
Financial Adviser to CPMG. While discharging duties of DAP the
DAP office assists the DAP but in capacity as CIFA the DAP accords
advice in his individual capacity & examines files, puts remarks and
marks file to CPMG. The ACAO has forwarded the Report of DAP.
The irregularities have been mentioned in Para-7(iii) of this Report.
9 Circle Office Letter
No. VIG/12-6/2007
dated 29.4.2008.

Pages - 16
(a). Content - Regarding payment of pending Bills of Civil work at
Guna HO and Morar HO setting up of Finance Mart.
(b). The post of PMG Indore was vacant from 02.06.2007 to
31.03.2008, & Smt Madhu Narayanan, CPMG was holding the charge
of PMG Indore. All the case files had been sent to Circle Office for
according approval in Regional Office Files but CPMG returned all
files without approval. Instead approval was being conveyed through
secondary sources without enclosing the copies of relevant extracts on
which approval was being conveyed. The approval in File of R.O was
required to be accorded, which was proper procedure. Smt Madhu
Narayanan had a doubtful style of functioning and was known not to
take responsibility. The Department of Posts has duly acknowledged
this fact in File No. 28-24/2009-SPG. Later on when regular PMG
Shri B B Dave, DPS (HQ) Bhopal joined on promotion he examined
and rejected the Bills in those very Files of R.O which had been
returned by Smt Madhu Narayanan.
10 Circle Office Letter
No. VIG/12-6/2007
dated 19.5.2008.

(a). Content - Regarding payment of pending Bills of Civil work at
Guna HO and Morar HO setting up of Finance Mart.
(b). No approval was granted by Smt Madhu Narayanan in Regional
Office files sent to her. It needs to be checked whether concerned C.O
14

Pages - 17 Files which are crucial evidence have been destroyed because Smt
Narayanan style of functioning is such she keeps such files in her
personal custody & then destroys the same before demitting office.
Since those officers have been hand picked & posted as Head of Circle
of MP Circle who are sympathetic to cause of Shri Gauriar & Smt
Narayanan, thus destruction of evidence is important point for
consideration.
11 Memo No. AD
BLDG/FM/2007-08
dated 3.3.2008.

Pages - 18
(a). Content - Memo regarding setting up of Circle level Committee by
CPMG.
(b). The Chief PMG, MP Circle got three Circle level Committees set
up to enquire into the matter.
(a). First Committee vide CO Memo No. VIG/12-6/2007 dated
26.11.2007.
(b). Second Committee vide CO Memo No. VIG/12-6/2007 dated
27.2.2008.
But these two committees never submitted any report despite issue of
R.O Letter No. Vig./01/Misc/08, dated 24
th
April 2008, subject
regarding maintenance Work of Guna HO, Morar HO and Mandsaur
HO.
(c). Third Committee vide CO Memo No. AD (BLDG)/FM/2007-
2008 dated 13.03.2008 was formed. This Committee had submitted
only one report dated 25.03.2008. This four Member Committee
comprising of Shri D.C Bhavsar, AD(Building) Circle Office, Bhopal,
Shri R. K Shrivastava, Asstt. Chief Accounts Officer of DAP Office,
and Shri Brajendra Kumar, Assistant Engineer Postal Civil Division,
Bhopal, along with concerned Divisional Head had as per their Report
clearly stated the flouting of rules and inability to verify the quality of
work, specifications of work /material used and workmanship etc
because in the bills description of items has not been explained and
given in half or single line, the rates are also more than DSR Rates.
12 Letter No.
AD(BLDG)/FM/2007-
08 dated 25.03.2008.

Pages 19-21
(a). Content - Report of Circle level Committee on work done under
Finance Mart at Dewas HPO.
(b). The four Member Committee comprising of Shri D.C Bhavsar,
AD(Building) Circle Office, Bhopal, Shri R. K Shrivastava, Asstt.
Chief Accounts Officer of DAP Office, and Shri Brajendra Kumar,
Assistant Engineer Postal Civil Division, Bhopal, along with concerned
Divisional Head had as per their Report clearly stated the flouting of
rules and inability to verify the quality of work, specifications of work
/material used and workmanship etc because in the bills description of
items has not been explained and given in half or single line, the rates
are also more than DSR Rates.
13 Shri S.M Pingle Letter
dated 4
th
May 2009
w.r.t R.O Indore
Letter No.
DPS/CON/2009 dated
4.5.2009.

Pages - 22
(a). Content - Shri S.M Pingle then AD(Bldg/BD) disowning his own
Inquiry Report dated 19.02.2008.
(b). Shri S.M Pingle has given this written Statement on 04.05.2009
after a long gap of one year two months after submission of inquiry
report, as his report is dated 19.02.2008. This Statement dated
04.05.2009, has been written under duress as Shri S.M Pingle retired
on 30.06.2009 & had just 01 month left for retirement & therefore
succumbed to the pressure tactics of Shri V.C Roy, the then DPS
Indore, who acted at the behest of Shri Santosh Gauriar. The details are
available in Para-9 of this Report.
14 R.O Indore Letter
No.B/1-1/Guna HPO
dated 3.8.95.
(a). Content - Letter addressed to Contractor Shri Sanjay Kumar
Jabulkar regarding Annual Repair & maintenance of HPO Building at
Guna. It is not clear from the letter as to whether the work had been
15


Pages - 23
allotted to Contractor through Postal Civil Wing or directly by the
Regional Office. In case the work was allotted by Civil Wing then the
Regional Office was required to address the Assistant Engineer who
had awarded work to Contractor and can levy penalty as per tender
clause. The Letter regarding unsatisfactory work of Contractor has not
even been endorsed to the Postal Civil Wing who might have awarded
the work. In case the Regional Office had awarded the work to
Contractor directly then they should have stopped this practice &
allowed Postal Civil Wing space & freedom to carry out its duties.
(b). The Department is maintaining a separate Specialized Agency i.e.
Postal Civil Wing which should be the final word in all technical
matters pertaining to building construction, repairs etc. The
Department is incurring huge expenditure on maintaining the Postal
Civil Wing thus it is imperative that its services are utilized fully and
the time and energy of the Postal staff is not diverted towards such
extraneous activities which can easily be carried out by the specialized
Agency. The Civil Wing has never given its refusal in writing that it
cannot or does not want to carry out the Civil works given to it by the
Postal Administration. Thus there was no urgency that the work was
given to a private contractor without even bothering to float tenders &
follow proper procedure.
15 SPOs Guna Letter No.
D-2-1/98-99 dated
24.4.98.

Pages 24-25
(a). Content - Regarding vertical extension of Guna HO Building for
construction of Divisional Office Building Guna with reference to
telephonic talk dated 24.4.98.
(b). Irrelevant Reference.
The O/o PMG Indore had vide their telephonic talk on 24.4.98, called
for proposal from Superintendent of Post offices Guna Division. It has
not been questioned why work at Guna HO was carried out thus
justification is unnecessary. The question is why proper procedure was
not followed, work order not issued as per rules or why work was not
assigned to Postal Civil Wing.
16 DO No. B-1-1/Guna
dated 2
nd
Sept. 2004
from Shri J.P Bajaj
addressed to Shri B.L
Mehra, E.E (C) PC Dn.
Bhopal.

Pages - 26
(a). Content Letter dated 02.09.2004, Regarding submission of
Estimates for repair to approach road of Guna HPO, Boundary wall,
office accommodation for SPOs Guna in existing HPO Guna, by the
Executive Engineer, Bhopal based on Visit Remarks dated 22.06.2004.
(b). The Superintendent Engineer had vide his Letter dated 13.11.2007
cited numerous shortcomings. The details have been given in Para-
6(v)&(vii) and Para-7(i) of this Report.
17 SPOs Guna Letter No.
D-2-86/2000 dated
9.8.2000

Pages - 27
(a). Content - Regarding request for construction of Divisional Office
in Guna HPO.
(b). Irrelevant Reference. It has not been questioned why Divisional
Office has been shifted to Guna HO. Thus justification is unnecessary.
The question is why proper procedure was not followed, work order
not issued as per rules or why work was not assigned to Postal Civil
Wing.
18 Visit Report of
Divisional Office,
Guna dated 29.07.2004
carried out by Shri L.N
Sharma, then Director
Postal Services, Indore
Region.

(a). Content This is the Visit Report of then Director.
(b). Irrelevant Reference. It has not been questioned why Divisional
Office has been shifted to Guna HO. Thus justification is unnecessary.
The question is why proper procedure was not followed, work order
not issued as per rules or why work was not assigned to Postal Civil
Wing.
16

Pages 28-29
19 Regional Office Letter
No. VR-01/D.O
Guna/DPS/06 dated
21.06.2007.

Pages - 30
(a). Content The Regional Office Indore vide their Letter No.
VR-01/D.O Guna/DPS/06 dated 21.06.2007, addressed the SPOs Guna
w.r.t Divisional office Guna Letter No.VR/1-1/Guna/173 dated
03.01.2007.
(b). Irrelevant Reference. It has not been questioned why Divisional
Office has been shifted to Guna HO. Thus justification is unnecessary.
The question is why proper procedure was not followed, work order
not issued as per rules or why work was not assigned to Postal Civil
Wing.
20 C.O Letter No.
Tech/24-02/72/II dated
26.05.2006.

Pages - 31
(a). Content - C.O Letter No. Tech/24-02/72/II dated 26.05.2006
regarding Selection for setting up of Postal Finance Marts during the
current year 2006-07 has been enclosed.
(b). For the Financial Year 2006-07, the Directorate had allotted targets
and funds to all Circles vide DGs Letter No. 113-15/2004-FS dated
28.04.2006. The Circle Office further allotted target and funds to
Indore Region vide its Letter dated 26.05.2006.
(i).There was ample time from 26.05.2006 to 31.03.2007 to complete
the work. The Circle Office had in its Letter dated 26.05.2006 further
stated that, Kindly utilize the Plan funds after observing due
formalities before 31.1.2007 and report compliance. A monthly report
on the targets achieved and funds utilized during the particular month
may be furnished in the prescribed Proforma enclosed along with DGs
Letter No.113-15/2004-FS dated 28.04.2006.
(ii). Thus urgency, rush of work, paucity of time cannot be cited as
reason for non adherence or non following of rules. Let alone Prime
Ministers office , even DG has insisted on observing due formalities.
21 R.O Letter No. BDC 2-
27/F Mart/06-07 dated
7/8 June 2006.

Pages 32-34
(a). Content Six Divisional Heads have been allotted Targets for
Setting up of Postal Finance Mart during the year 2006-07.
(b). Irrelevant Reference. The allotment of Target for setting up of
Financial Marts has not been questioned. Thus justification is
unnecessary. The question is why proper procedure was not followed,
work order not issued as per rules despite allotment of Targets in the
month of June 2006 & ample time of 9 months of the Financial Year
were available & why the work was taken up only in the fag end of
Financial Year.
22 Extract of File Noting
32/N

Pages - 35
(a). Content This is page 32/N of some File of which the File
Number has not been mentioned nor the name of office where the
proposed expenditure is to be incurred has been mentioned.
(b). The Assistant Director Shri R.C Borkhadia has submitted proposal
in File. Assistant Director is technically not qualified to prepare and
submit estimates for civil construction work. This is required to be
done by Postal Civil Wing which alone has the expertise & technical
knowledge.
23 Extract of File Noting
34/N dated 28.9.06.

Pages - 36
(a). Content This is page 34/N of some File of which the File
Number has not been mentioned nor the name of office where the
proposed expenditure is to be incurred has been mentioned.
(b). The Assistant Director belonging to PSS Group-B Service, is
technically not qualified to prepare and submit estimates for civil
construction work. Moreover then PMG Indore Smt. Indu Gupta had
raised Queries regarding visit to decide taking technical/financial
expert assistance and scope of inquiry. To which Shri S.M Pingle then
AD had vide his Letter dated 4
th
May 2009 given in Para-9(1) of this
Report & also at Sl No-13 above, that he did not visit the site, did not
17

take any technical or financial assistance. Extract of File Noting 34/N
dated 28.9.06 is the proposal prepared in file by Assistant Director has
been prepared without any assistance from technical or financial
experts.
(c). Therefore we cannot follow two different yardsticks. The Assistant
Director, Shri R.C Borkhadia, had prepared proposal in File Note at
32/N & 34/N dated 28.9.06 without any technical help. On the same
analogy the Assistant Director, Shri S.M Pingle, also prepared Inquiry
Report dated 19.02.2008 without technical help.
24 R.O Letter No.BDC/2-
27/PURAK/06-07
dated 4
th
October 2006.

Pages - 37
(a). Content This is Letter from Assistant Director to Divisional
Head conveying approval for getting work carried out by inviting
tenders and on quotation basis.
(b). The approval was granted on 04.10.2006 with specific instructions
to complete the work by December 2006. However several
irregularities were noticed as per details given in Para-6(iii) of this
Report.

25 Postmaster Dewas HO
Letter No. H-2/
Financial Mart/06-07
Dewas dated
15.05.2007 addressed
to SPOs Indore
Muffassil Division.

Pages 38
(a). Content The Postmaster has conveyed that the Committee has
certified the work carried out in Dewas HO.
(b). The Four (4) Member Committee comprises of
Postmaster Dewas HPO, Assistant Supdt of Post Offices, Dewas,
Deputy Postmaster Dewas and Postal Assistant Dewas HPO.
Formation of such junior level Non-Gazetted officials from Postal
Operations side to certify Civil Construction work is not covered under
the rules.

26 Karyavrit dated 2.3.06
signed by Shri R.C
Borkhadia, AD(Estt),
Shri A.K Dube,
A.E(Civil), Shri H.P
Vishwakarma,
Accounts Officer.

Pages - 39
(a). Content This is copy of Karyavrit dated 2.3.06 signed by Shri
R.C Borkhadia, AD(Estt), Shri A.K Dube, A.E(Civil), Shri H.P
Vishwakarma, Accounts Officer. The Committee gave its approval to
rates of Milind Construction after negotiation. The Committee has
stated that rates of contractor are higher than approved DSR Rates
fixed by CPWD & followed by Postal Civil Wing. Shri L.N Sharma,
then Director Postal Services has accorded approval on 3.3.06 for
amount of Rs. 9,83,806/- on the ground that, In view of above &
approaching financial year end, the rates of 11 items negotiated by the
Committee are approved. The payment will however be made after
verification & certification of amount/quantity of work, under each
item by Divisional Head. If a wrong procedure was being adopted
in the past it cannot become grounds to justify continuing the same
irregularity.

(b). In Financial Year 2005-06, last minute approval has been granted
on 3.3.06, for civil construction work, which is not possible to
complete within that financial year which ends on 31.3.2006. It needs
to be ascertained on what date the Directorate allotted funds and why
work has been awarded at last moment. Shri Santosh Gauriar had
joined Indore Region as PMG on 30.01.2006, his predecessor Shri O.S
Veerwal had relinquished charge on 23.11.2005 and post of PMG
Indore was vacant for just 67 days.

(c). As per DG Posts Letter No.48-1/03/Tech dated 22.10.2003, the
Directorate had issued guidelines that in every Circle/Region a three
Member Committee will be formed comprising of Director Postal
Services, Divisional Head and Assistant Engineer (Civil) who will
18

submit joint report after visiting the concerned Post offices selected by
Circle/Region for modernization. Thereafter once the Report is
accepted by HoC or HoR the Civil Wing will carry out all work of
Civil nature and the Divisional Head will purchase other items like
furniture etc as per recommendations of Committee after taking due
approval and following proper procedure. Such Committees headed by
DPS had been formed to ensure cohesion, proper monitoring and avoid
delay caused by calling for reports, raising queries and back references
etc. Thus wrong procedure was adopted in Year 2005-06 and DPS
should have submitted proposal to PMG, who is competent authority.
Therefore this evidence does not hold ground and can be rejected.

11. Shri Gauriar worked as CPMG Rajasthan Circle from 02.06.2007 to 11.04.2010 and
thereafter posted as CPMG Madhya Pradesh Circle from 12.04.2010 to 03.11.2011 and then
as Member(Operations) Postal Board from 04.11.2011 to 31.05.2012, date of his retirement.
This conspiracy would never have been known to Ms. Madhuri, except as a matter of sheer
chance, as she had applied under RTI for copy of documents which were provided vide SPG
File No. 24-32/2013-SPG. While examining these documents she came across these
deceptive Letters.

(a). Soon after Ms. Madhuri (IPoS-1989) attended the Court at Indore on 20.04.2011 in
her official capacity, the then Member (PLI), Maj. Gen. V Sadashivam, under pressure from
Shri Alok Saxena (IPoS-1989), who was operating at the behest of Shri Santosh Gauriar,
recalled the Tour file and irregularly withdrew his earlier approval after the tour had been
completed. Maj. Gen. V Sadashivam, marked the file to Shri Alok Saxena (IPoS-1989),
Secretary (PSB) who conspired with Shri Gauriar and created evidence at a later date to build
a false case against Ms. Madhuri Dabral (IPoS-1989).

(b). Thereafter Ms. Madhuri Dabral, Director(Work Study) was irregularly transferred
from the Directorate within 5 months of posting and she relinquished charge on 06.06.2011.
The Administration Branch at the behest of Shri Saxena addressed Letter No. TAA-14/2011-
12/C&A/PB dated 10
th
June 2011, calling for clarification from Shri Santosh Gauriar, the
accused officer against whom the criminal case had been filed, regarding tour performed by
Ms. Madhuri Dabral (IPoS-1989), Director(WS) on 20
th
April 2011 to attend summons by
Honble Court at Indore. Shri Gauriar, instead of recusing himself from the matter due to
conflict of interest, submitted his reply on expected lines downplaying the seriousness of the
charges leveled against him in the criminal case lodged against him. He addressed Shri Alok
Saxena (IPoS-1989), Secretary (PSB) vide his Letter No. CPMG/MP/Conf./2011-12 dated
20.6.2011. In this Letter dated 20.6.2011, Shri Santosh Gauriar has stated as under:-

To

Shri Alok Saxena
DDG(Tech.) & Secretary PSB CONFIDENTIAL
Office of DG, Department of Posts
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi-110001.

No. CPMG/MP/Conf./2011-12 dated 20.6.2011

Subject : Tour performed by Ms. Madhuri Dabral, Director(WS) on 20
th
April 2011 to attend
19

a summon by Honble Court, Indore Reg.

Reference : DG Posts No. TAA-14/2011-12/C&A/PB dated 10
th
June 2011

As the matter pertains to the Court in Indore, report of the PMG Indore was obtained
which is enclosed for perusal. It is added that Ms. Madhuri Dabral was well aware that it was
a private case as she had received summons earlier too and had been in regular touch with the
complainant Shri Ravi Kumar Potdar and her ex PA Shri S.K Saha. She was required to put
these facts before the competent authority, sought leave and attended the Court at Indore in a
private capacity as a witness of the complainant. It is clear from the Courts order sheet dated
12.7.2010 and 12.8.2010 (photocopy enclosed with PMG letter) that the travelling expenses
to be paid to a private witness was to be deposited in the Court by the private complainant.
To help the complainant, Ms. Madhuri Dabral misinterpreted it as a departmental case and
obtained TA advance from the department and made her visit as on Govt. duty. Copy of her
letter to PMG Indore and her tour programme will reveal this (copy enclosed). The Asstt.
Govt. counsel who was available in the Court has also informed that when the Honble
Judicial Magistrate First class enquired about the travelling expenses, she informed the Court
that she was on Govt. Duty. Thus Ms. Madhuri Dabral not only helped the private
complainant financially at the cost of the Department of Posts but also gave a false and
misleading statement on oath to the Magistrate in the Court of Law. The amount of Rs.200/-
deposited by the complainant is only a token amount to initiate the procedure.

At present the matter is only at the stage of complaint and the complainant has to
produce evidence and witnesses at his own expense. As the case has not been registered by
the Court and no summons issued to the officers complained against, there is no scope for
defending the case. Details of the case as to how Ms. Madhuri Dabral was involved in the
complaint case was sent to Honble Secretary to GOI and DG department of Posts through
my confidential letter dated July 9, 2009. This report is being sent for taking necessary action
by the appropriate authority against Ms. Madhuri Dabral for misrepresentation and obtaining
TA on false ground with an intention to cheat the Government and help a private individual.

-Sd-
Santosh Gauriar
Chief Postmaster General
Encl: As above 20.06.2011.

(c). Shri Gauriar got his subordinate, the then PMG Indore, Shri S.R Meena to support
and endorse his conjectures and assist him in building up the case vide his Letter No.
AD(E)/Con/CC(BD)/09 dated 16.06.2011. In this Letter dated 16.06.2011, Shri S.R
Meena, PMG Indore who was the subordinate of the accused officer, gave unsubstantiated
false information as under:-

To

Shri Santosh Gauriar
Chief Postmaster General
MP Circle, Bhopal-462012

No.AS(E)/Con/CC(BD)/09 dated at Indore the 16-06-2011

20

Subject : Tour performed by Ms. MadhuriDabral, Director(WS) on 20
th
April 2011 to attend a
summon by Honble Court of Indore regarding.

Ref : Your No. TAA-14/2011-12/C&A/PB dated 10-06-2011

With reference to above referred letter the required information is as under :-

A private complaint has been submitted by one Shri Ravikumar Potdar in the court of
Honble CJM Indore under 0/2007 against Shri Santosh Gauriar, the then Postmaster General
Indore and three other officers namely Shri R.C Borkhadia, AD (BD) RO Indore, Shri A.K
Tomar, AD(S) RO Indore and ShriS.M Gupta, SPOs Indore Mfl. Dn. about repairs and
maintenance work and expenditure under finance mart. The maintenance and civil work was
carried out in Mandsaur, Guna, Gwalior, Dewas etc. for finance mart purpose during the
period of Shri Santosh Gauriar the then Postmaster General, Indore (30-01-2006 to 02-06-
2007)

It is further stated that the case has not been registered so far and nobody is defending
the case either from the Deptt. side or from Shri Santosh Gauriar, and others. Smt. Madhuri
Dabral, Director(W.S) was summoned by Honble Court of Indore for giving primary
evidence from the applicant side as a witness as ordered by the Honble Court. Copy of order
sheet dated 12-07-2010 & 12-08-2010 is also enclosed, from which it is clear that Ms.
Madhuri Dabral was witness from applicant side and the expenses of witness attendance are
to be borne by the applicant. It is also clear from summon issued from Honble Court to Ms.
Madhuri Dabral that payment of Rs.200/- has been deposited in the court against attendance
of witness by the applicant. The expense will be paid to witness on her attendance in the
court.

It is learnt that the applicant Shri Ravi Potdar met Ms. Madhuri Dabral and briefed
about his case.

-Sd-
(S.R Meena)
Postmaster General
Indore Region, Indore.

(d). Due to unethical practices adopted by Shri Santosh Gauriar and his supporting
officers, of attempting to influence Court staff and obtain copies of uncertified confidential
Court records, Ms Madhuri took up the matter vide her Letter dated 17
th
July 2013, with the
Honble First Class Judicial Magistrate, District Court Indore. Shri Gauriar had attached
uncertified confidential Court records obtained clandestinely, with his Letter dated 20.6.2011
and addressed to Shri Alok Saxena, in order to falsely implicate Ms. Madhuri. The Criminal
Case was later on transferred to the Honble Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate
who after examining the records of the case, ordered for registering a criminal case under
Section 409, 420 and 120 B IPC and issued summons to the accused, to be present in the
Court on 28.4.2014.

(e). Armed with these two Letters cited above, Shri Alok Saxena (IPoS-1989), Secretary
(PSB) illegally forwarded the TA Bill File No. TAA-14/2011-12/C&A/PB of Administration
Branch of Directorate, to then CPMG Punjab Circle, Late Shri K.L Khanna who marked the
File to Smt Ranju Prasad. Smt Prasad, PMG (Region), Punjab was not the competent
21

authority to take decision on a matter decided/retracted by an officer of the level of Member
of Postal Services Board. However the reason for forwarding the file to Punjab Circle was
due to mala-fides. Thus based on just three letters from the accused officer i.e. Shri Gauriar,
ignoring his conflict of interest and treating these as evidence i.e. confidential letter dated
July 9, 2009 and Letter No. CPMG/MP/ACRs/2010-11 dated 16th November 2010 and Letter
No. CPMG/MP/Conf./2011-12 dated 20.6.2011; a false case was opened at the behest of Shri
Gauriar by Shri Alok Saxena. Ms. Madhuri had forwarded to the Administration Branch an
Appeal dated 8
th
January 2013 addressed to Shri Kapil Sibal, Honble MOC & IT regarding
irregularly denying her TA claim for appearing as witness in Court in a criminal case filed
against Shri Santosh Gauriar, Rtd. Member (O) P.S.B and thereafter falsely implicating her in
a Vigilance case of bogus TA claim. The Administration Branch in the Directorate refused to
handle the representation and therefore the matter was referred to DDG(Vig.). No response or
reply has been received from Vigilance branch till date despite lapse of more than one year.

12. Thus the sequence of events of this conspiracy orchestrated at the behest of Shri
Santosh Gauriar is briefly given as under :-

Sl.
No.
Sequence Dates
1 Filing of criminal complaint in Court at Indore by an RTI activist. Year 2007
2 During the period from 09.05.2008 to 31.03.2010, when Ms. Madhuri was on
deputation in the MOUD, Shri Gauriar brought pressure through Shri A.K
Mehta, JS(UD) and thus spoiled the working relations. Shri A.K Mehta
belonged to the same hometown in Bihar, hence was close to Shri Gauriar. Shri
Mehta used ACR as a means of bargaining to favour Shri Gauriar. The Details
have been given in Para 20. (c) of her representation dated 24.09.2010, She has
given facts regarding pressure put by Shri Gauriar from officers in the
Department and Ministry of UD where she was on deputation. In this regard
Para-3(vi) at Page-13 of her Appeal dated 29
th
July 2011 and Memorial to the
President dated 16.11.2010 also refers.
09.05.2008
to
31.03.2010
3 Shri V.C Roy then Director Indore vide his Letter No. DPS/CON/2009 dated
04.05.2009 called for explanation of Shri S.M Pingle, A.D (BLDG.) who
replied vide his letter dated 04.05.2009 disowning his own Inquiry Report dated
19.02.2008.
04.05.2009
4 Shri Gauriar addressed DG Posts vide his Letter dated 9
th
July 2009. This fact
has been mentioned in his Letter No. CPMG/MP/Conf./2011-12 dated
20.6.2011 that, Details of the case as to how Ms. Madhuri Dabral was
involved in the complaint case was sent to Honble Secretary to GOI and DG
Department of Posts through my confidential letter dated July 9, 2009.
09.07.2009
5 Shri S.R Meena then PMG Indore, filed a 39 page reply vide Letter dated
16.9.2009 before the Court containing unsubstantiated wrong facts. Shri S.R
Meena had filed an official reply on behalf of the Department in support of such
willful creation of false evidence and then surreptitiously included it in the
reply filed on behalf of the department in a case in which the State was not a
party.
16.9.2009
6 Summons issued to Ms. Madhuri Dabral for attending Court as witness on
28.07.2010. Officer could not attend due to pressure exerted by Shri Gauriar
from all sides to give Statement that the Bills had been rejected due to error in
understanding the matter. Ms. Madhuri came under extreme tension and fell ill
& did not proceed to Indore.
28.07.2010
7 A second summons was delivered through Delhi Police and after taking
approval of Tour Program and advance amount for tickets Ms. Madhuri Dabral
proceeded to Indore and recorded her Statement on 20.04.2011
20.04.2011
22

8 Soon after her proceeding on Tour, Shri Alok Saxena pressurized Shri
Sadashivam, Member to withdraw permission for tour at a later date &
thereafter addressed Shri Gauriar, the accused officer & then CPMG Madhya
Pradesh Circle (12.04.2010 to 03.11.2011) to send travel details of Ms. Madhuri
to Indore vide his Letter No. TAA-14/2011-12/C&A/PB dated 10-06-2011. In
order to strengthen the case & create supporting documents, Shri Santosh
Gauriar further called for report from Shri S.R Meena, PMG Indore.
10.06.2011
9 Shri S.R Meena, PMG Indore submitted reply to Shri Gauriar vide Letter No.
AD(E)/Con/CC(BD)/09 dated 16.06.2011 enclosing uncertified confidential
Court papers he was not authorized to possess.
16.06.2011
10 Shri Santosh Gauriar addressed to Shri Alok Saxena, DDG(Tech.) & Secretary
PSB, Postal Directorate vide his Confidential Letter No. CPMG/MP/Conf./
2011-12 dated 20.6.2011.
20.6.2011
11 The Statement of Shri S.R Meena, PMG Indore was recorded on 23.08.2011,
before Indore Court, in which he has clearly cited irregularities & named Shri
V.C Roy.
23.08.2011
12 The Statement of Shri B.B Dave, then PMG Indore was recorded on 10.10.2011
before Indore Court.
10.10.2011
13 Since Shri Gauriar was about to join Directorate therefore Ms. Madhuri had to
temporarily be sent away from Directorate. Therefore Shri Alok Saxena
illegally abolishes Work Study Branch & Ms Madhuri is irregularly transferred
to Punjab Circle on 03.06.2011 within just one year of posting in Directorate.
Shri Saxena sends the concerned TA File of Directorate to Punjab Circle. Shri
Gauriar joins Directorate on 04.11.2011 on his promotion as
Member(Operations) & continued as such till 31.05.2012 i.e. his date of
retirement. Ms Madhuri was reposted to the Directorate and rejoined on
02.07.2012.
03.06.2011
&
02.07.2012
14 Case registered by the Court vide its Order dated 19
th
February 2014, that there
was sufficient evidence to Register a Criminal case against Shri Santosh
Gauriar and proceed against him under Section 409, 420 and 120 B IPC and
issued summons to the accused to be present in the Court on 28.4.2014.
19.2.2014

13. After filing of criminal complaint in Court by the RTI activist, Shri Gauriar embarked
on his mission of revenge, targeting each officer one by one who did not side with him in
cover up of these irregularities as cited in this Report.

(i). Shri B.B Dave, the then PMG Indore (from 17.4.2008 to 29.08.2008) who rejected the
irregular Bills was unceremoniously transferred to Karnataka Circle within just 3-4 months of
his joining in Indore as Postmaster General.

(ii). Ms Madhuri Dabral, the then DPS Indore who had submitted Note in File to the then
PMG Indore Shri B.B Dave recommending rejection of irregular Bills was also harassed and
frequently transferred as the officer has been transferred four (4) times in the last three (3)
years. She was intentionally posted to Punjab Circle under Smt Ranju Prasad who held a
grudge against Ms Madhuri as FIR No. 13 dated 01.03.1996, had been lodged against against
Smt Ranju Prasad by the CBI as Principle Offender being accused number one under Section
120-B r/w 420,467,468, 471 of the Indian Penal code and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention
of Corruption Act 1988. The Department placed Smt Ranju under suspension and charge of
office was taken over by Ms Madhuri who was directed to hand over records of the case &
assist the CBI. The details of persecution and harassment of Ms Madhuri Dabral, is available
in DG File No. CS/APARs/2011-12/Instns.(Pt.)/Punj. and DG File No.7-2/2012-Bldg. The
Officer was harassed in Punjab Circle and an attack was orchestrated causing injury and the
23

officer was forced to seek protection of Court vide her Letter dated 16.11.2011. She was
further persecuted and a bogus case created regarding submission of Bogus TA Bill
pertaining to her Court attendance for appearing as a witness in the Court at Indore. The
details of persecution are contained in the 11 Appeals addressed to Honble Minister of
Communications. The DDG(P) Shri V.P Singh in connivance with Shri Alok Saxena has
refused to submit the Appeals before the Minister. Ms Madhuri filed case in CAT vide OA
No-2201/2013 on 02.07.2013 requesting Court to give directions to submit her Appeals
before the Minister. The CAT upheld the rights of officer and gave directions accordingly.
Contempt Petition was filed by the officer on 22.04.2014 vide No. CP/177/2014 in OA No.
2201/2013, however still no action was taken.

(iii). Shri R.K Raghuvanshi was posted as SSPOs Gwalior vide CO Memo No. STA-1-
790/Gr.A dated 27.07.2006. However he had initially refused to give completion certificate
and become party to all this haphazard construction activity. He was transferred as SSPOs
Jabalpur vide CO Memo No. STA 12-1/Gr.-A/2007 dated 5.7.2007. But he was unable to
withstand pressure from Smt Madhu Narayanan, CPMG and therefore took voluntary
retirement from service under severe pressure and due to intimidation and being transferred
to Jabalpur because he was reluctant to become a part of this gross violation of rules. Shri
Raghuvanshi preferred voluntary retirement notice vide No. SSP/PF/RKR/07 dated 6.7.2007
which was accepted vide DG Posts Letter No. 13-21/2007-SPG dated 28.9.2007.

(iv). The promotion of Shri R. Surendra the then RIFA, Regional Office, Indore was
delayed and was given promotion after submitting several representations and after his
juniors had already been promoted. The RIFA, Shri R. Surendra had come on transfer from
Hyderabad & was insistent upon following the rules. He had strongly objected in RO File No.
BDC/2-27/06-07/II about the irregular practice of the AD (BD/Estt) R.O of issuing sanction
Memos directly to the Sr. Postmaster, Indore without the knowledge of the Drawing &
Disbursing Officer (DDO) and no sanction is being marked to the DDO for making payment.

(v). Shri Brajendra Kumar, Assistant Engineer Postal Civil Division, Bhopal, was
persecuted so much that he sought transfer from MP Circle.As per CO Memo No. AD
(BLDG)/FM/2007-2008 dated 13.03.2008 a four Member Committee which included Shri
Brajendra Kumar, Assistant Engineer Postal Civil Division, Bhopal as one of its Technical
Member had been constituted. Shri Brajendra Kumar was pressurized to give report in favour
of the Contractors. The Committee submitted its report dated 25.03.2008 and clearly cited the
flouting of rules and inability to verify the quality of work, specifications of work /material
used and workmanship etc because in the bills description of items has not been explained
and given in half or single line, the rates are also more than DSR Rates.

(vi). Shri S.K Saha, Steno to Shri S.M Pingle the then Asstt. Director (Estt.& BD) was
placed under suspension and issued 3-4 charge sheets in quick succession and pressurized to
withdraw his statement before the Court that the disowned Inquiry Report dated 19.02.2008
of Shri Pingle had been typed by him. Due to recording of correct Statement in Court by Shri
Saha, the ulterior action of Shri V.C Roy stood exposed as Shri Roy had created false
evidence at a later date. Shri Gauriar also lodged a Police Complaint against Shri S.K Saha,
vide his Letter No.PMG/IND/CONF/GENL/07-08 dated 11 April 2007 at Sanyogitaganj
Thana vide their Diary No.S.P/Sanyogitaganj /II/793/07/26.4.07.

(vii). Shri B.S Patel, APMG(Staff), R.O Indore was entrusted with a Preliminary Inquiry
into an pseudonymous complaint against Shri S.K Saha. Since Shri Patel did not carry out
24

the orders of Shri Gauriar to give a conclusive report clearly implicating Shri Saha, thus Shri
Gauriar the then Chief PMG M.P Circle cancelled the Ad-hoc promotion of Shri Patel from
APMG, JTS Group-A to Assistant Director-III, Group-B thus causing lifelong financial loss
as his Pension was adversely affected. Still not satisfied and full of vengeance and revenge,
Shri Gauriar, the then CPMG M.P Circle dug out an old Inquiry in which some
administrative lapses had been fixed upon a large number of officers, but singled out Shri
Patel and issued him a charge sheet under Rule-16. Later on the next CPMG MP Circle, Shri
A. Tripathi let off Shri Patel with a Censure.

14. Thus officers who had sided with Shri Gauriar were rewarded and officers who did
not side with him were persecuted and implicated in false cases. Since Shri V. C Roy had
sanctioned the already rejected Bills of Contractor and had also created false evidence by
forcing Shri Pingle to give a Statement in writing disowning his own Inquiry Report, thus
Shri Gauriar took care to protect his interests and reward him for his loyalty. Thus Shri
Gauriar with the active connivance and support of Shri Salim Haque, the then DDG(P)
ensured that the decisions on the various representations submitted by Ms. Madhuri Dabral
are dumped. Thus these representations were intentionally kept pending and all of a sudden
after a long gap of 9-10 months these were got hurriedly rejected on the ground that DG Posts
Rule 174(7) of the Postal Manual Volume-III need not be followed. The representation of
Ms. Dabral against the below Benchmark ACR for the year 2006-07 written by Shri Gauriar
was submitted in File and unauthorizedly decided by Smt B.P Sridevi, then Director(Staff) at
her own level on 11.07.2011. In the concerned File no written orders of the then Secretary
Posts exist. Moreover the negative contents of noting of Smt B.P Sridevi had already been
rejected in File No. 28-41/2010-SPG by the then Secretary Posts, yet she repeated the same
by misrepresenting facts. Smt B.P Sridevi also did not bother to show the draft rejection
orders before issue to the DG & Secretary Posts and issued orders at her own level. Moreover
on submission of Appeal against rejection of first representation by the officer, Shri Salim
Haque the then DDG(P) knowingly misrepresented, and gave false information in File that
DOP&T has opined that no further Appeal can be submitted by officers. The DOPT vide its
RTI reply dated 5
th
November 2012 provided copies of its File Noting to Ms. Madhuri
Dabral, in which it had clearly stated that the earlier provision for a Memorial to the President
against the decision of the competent authority still existed and would remain. These two
Officers had the temerity to reject the Rules of Postal Manuals issued under the authority of
DG Posts as well as overrule DOP&T Orders and therefore exceeded and misused their
powers. Thus jeopardizing the very integrity of the institution.

15. The brazenness with which these officers were plotting and fearlessly implementing
their nefarious designs only shows that they have no fear of authority or any future
repercussions or possibility of accountability for their acts. The strategy of Shri Salim Haque
was to delay the holding of DPC on one pretext or the other so that the number of vacancies
in SAG swells and covers Shri V.C Roys Batch also. Thus the fear raked up by Shri V.C Roy
who acted victim, would be taken care of, that he did not want to do anything against Ms.
Dabral as she is senior to him and may face problem in future, as these two officers promised
him that Ms. Dabral will anyway be dropped and he will be promoted before her and thus
will become senior and hence had nothing to fear These officers succeeded in their dangerous
endeavors of revenge and teaching Ms. Dabral a lesson, thus Shri V.C Roy enthused and
assured of his interests being taken care of, willingly and boldly carried out a massive cover
up operation and got the unfinished construction work of contractors completed at a later date
i.e. the unfinished work of private contractors for the year 2006-07 was got completed in the
year 2007-08 during his tenure which was camouflaged and expenditure as well as the old
25

items of work got re-booked and included in the new work which was mixed up with old
items of work to make it difficult to differentiate. Thus if the Court at Indore chose to get the
work verified then the old work could be exhibited as being completed. Thus the Government
faced double loss as it had to incur expenditure twice by getting the unfinished works
completed and expenditure re-booked under the guise of new work. Thus Smt Madhu
Narayanan, Shri V.C Roy, Smt Indu Gupta, Shri S.M Pingle and Officers of SPG Branch in
the Directorate have aided and abetted the criminal act of falsely implicating an honest officer
and building false evidence at a later date and therefore by virtue of their complicity have
become equally responsible as abettors in this criminal act.

* * * * * * * *