Friday, September 18, 2015


Tele-Fax: 23697701
(Central Head Quarter)
First Floor, Post Office Building, Padamnagar, Delhi 110007
President:                       M. Rajangam
General Secretary         S.S. Mahadevaiah
GDS/CHQ/41/1/2010                                     Dated: 11-09-2015


The Secretary,

Department of Posts,

Dak Bhavan,

New Delhi-110001

Sub:-      Revision of Security to be furnished by Gramin Dak Sevaks.

Ref:        Yours office letter No.6-18/2010-PEII dated 7.05.2010 and 30.11.2010



       A kind reference is invited to this union letter of even no. dated 18-07-2010, and 22-10-2010 on the above subject. The orders issued vide your office letter under reference are too harsh and deal a deadly blow to the GDS employees in the month in which the premia as per the revised amount of security bonds and periodicity are to be recovered. You will kindly agree that no scheme should be introduced or implemented which acts like an indirect punishment on the employees-especially the low paid GDS employees.

2.       Due to steep hike in the amount of the S. Bonds, the amount of premia naturally increases proportionately and the recovery of the premia for a five year book would mean recovery of a sufficient amount from the pay of the GDS employees. Before we discuss in detail the other shortcomings of the newly introduced scheme, we would place before you the following factual facts for your consideration:

(i)       The departmental employees who handle much more cash and valuables than the GDS employees are not called upon to furnish S.Bonds save, of course, treasures who are paid cash handling allowance in addition to the normal Pay and allowances. These departmental employees are not called upon to possess any landed property as a Condition of appointment. In case of GDS employees, especially BPM/SPMs they are required have landed property in their own names. The idea is that in case of any loss/fraud, the amount of loss can he recovered by getting issue of distress warrant from the value of the landed property. This is a sufficient security. Then there is no need for another security. We very sincerely feel what there is no ground that-so-ever for suspecting the integrity and honesty of the GDS employees in a quite discriminate manner.

(ii)      Secondly and more importantly to our knowledge there has not been a single case where the guarantor, be it bank or cooperative society has ever been called upon to make good the amount of bond and the amount of losses are recovered from other employees charged with contributory negligence such employees may be departmental employees or GDS employees. Then the question is why recover the permia of S.Bond from the GDS employees to fill the coffers of the banks or cooperative societies-such societies in most case donot cater to any need of the GDS employees.

(iii)   In Karnataka Circle F G Bond premium for Rs.25,000/- sum for 5 years at

Bangalore KCPC and Dharwad Co-op credit societies are Rs.1925/- and Rs.!260/- respectively and a good number of poor GDS in the circle are facing difficulty in paying the subscription, which is heavy, in one lump sum.  There is no provision for payment of premia in reasonable installments as per society bylaws.

(iv)  It is reported that in AP circle the premium amount for the said FG bond is low that is Rs.625/- for 5 years for the same amount of Rs.25,000/- guarantee.  As such we request you to do the needful in this regard to explore the possibilities of getting FG Bonds for GDS of our circle from the credit co-op societies of AP circle, e.g. Kurnool Division Co-Op Credit Society charges Rs.625/-.
Hence there is no need for getting S.Bond selectively from the GDS employees and
this has got to be stopped

3.       Now coming the newly introduced block of 5 years. This is most irregular and calous. How can the department guarantee that the GDS will not be promoted to departmental Post within the given period. More over, if God forbid, the employee expires or resigns for some reason within the 5 year period, what can justify the recovery of premia for the period he will not be in service. This scheme is most impracticable and harsh and has got to be withdrawn forth with.
       In view of what has been explained above, there is no need of obtaining fidelity bond selectively form the GDS employees and especially when not even in a single case, the guarantor has paid the amount of S.Bond in case of loss,

       You are, therefore, kindly requested to reconsider and do needful & mechanize this scheme.

     The scheme has to be withdrawn lock stock and barrel.
                                                                                    Yours faithfully,

                                                                                  (S.S Mahadevaiah)
                                                                                    General Secretary