Technical revival of silent accounts in post offices

Let us see what silent account is. If there is no transaction in an account for three years continuously that particular account will be treated as silent in post office. Every year there will be a set of silent accounts in the sub offices, SBCO is authorised to classify the accounts in silent account list and take the print of those accounts. Before the installation of computers SBCO officials had to manually enter the account number and the balance for the current year when it is treated as silent. Separate register is maintained for each year. It is not necessary or compulsory to have silent accounts in every sub office every year. Some offices might have, some need not have; it is dependent on the date of last transaction (DLT).

Silent registers are to be maintained for ever, there is no preservation period; silent registers are permanent registers. It has to be preserved for years and years. I have seen silent registers up to 1970 and one thing that I felt is registers written manually exist in good condition than those bundled using the print outs taken. Some registers are written using pencil which becomes brighter as the clock move forward. Sub offices will be given intimation regarding the silent accounts and in case of any transaction happen in that account, the pass book of that particular account should be forwarded to head office; official at head office will verify the pass book with the silent register and revive the account and give intimation to the sub office to revive it.

After 2002 treating accounts as silent was abandoned. Even if the account does not have transaction there is no need to treat the account as silent and keep registers. So the last register for silent accounts is in the year 2002.

In 2010 and 2011 a new circular was passed to revive the accounts technically in SBCO and not in sub offices. Technical revival method was incorporated in order to increase the number of accounts. Account having balance less than Rs 50 need not be included in the technical revival list. Those accounts have to be removed from the binder by taking service charge of Rs20 annually. The issue behind technical revival is another mistake like UP in MDG. The accounts are not revived for the correct amount as in register, mistakes in account numbers and interest for the pending years has not been posted.

Suppose the account 214325 was made silent in the year 2001 for an amount of Rs86.35

Error technical revival in SBCO will be 214352 for RS 86.35

So the account number is wrong and sometimes 214352 would have been a closed account but wrongly revived again.

Account 213456 was made silent in the year 1980, when taking technical revival SBCO has to pay the interest from 1979 which is not given during technical revival.

Account number 123456 was made silent for an amount for RS74.2, at the time of revival the amount became Rs74020. How responsible was the person in charge of technical revival. This is not a single case. I can provide you with more number of accounts where the revival amount has been wrongly entered; that too not for one or hundred rupee difference but thousands and ten thousands. Another account silent for Rs86.35 is technically revived for Rs86035. Who is responsible for the irresponsible works done in SBCO during the technical revival period? Does any government officer or higher authority credit back the salary given to these officers? Will they give extra payment for the tedious task of locating these mistakes for the past ten or 15 years? What would have happened if the depositor withdrew Rs 74020 claiming it? Is there no meaning for the works done in SBCO?

Now the supervisor and postal assistants in SBCO are undergoing a tedious task to correct these mistakes. Have to go through the silent registers of all previous years. There are cases where the account has been revived once and closed but again technically revived. Why the department is making rules or provisions? Is it for the benefit of department or for the loss? Department of post is running in Rs 6000 cr loss.

These are the wrong balances and number of accounts forwarded to Lok sabha during the time of annual budget. Based on these figures an amount will be granted for the department which flow to the hands of corporate assigned to implement core banking. Corporate companies do not have the task in providing infrastructure to the post offices that is to be done by the department of post alone. Official need a figure alone, whether it is correct or wrong is not a matter concerning them. If the department of post is like this you can just imagine the functioning of other departments in India.

After taking the technical revival next circular passed saying that while giving the number of live accounts, technically revived accounts should not be treated as live. It is not easy to sit and count the number of technically revived accounts. People making rules can simply make the rules and give orders saying do this, do those. Only if they work in the practical situation they will understand the difficulties faced by the post office employees.

There is no strong decision from the higher authorities to make some change in the current scenario. When one person in charge felt technical revival required it was implemented, the next person felt it is not essential asked not to count them as live accounts. It’s true – Nothing is permanent- especially in a democratic country like India.