Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Kishan Chand vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 27 November, 2025
1- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
Pronounced on: 27.11.2025
Reserved on: 03.11.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)
1. Original Application No. 063/33/2025
Tara Chand S/o Sh. Jalam Ram R/o Village Firnu P.O. Kao Tehsil Karsog,
Mandi, H.P aged about 52 years presently working as Telecom
Technician Karsog under SDO (T) Karsog under transfer CSC, Keylong
under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
......Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika Kondal
2. Original Application No. 063/34/2025
Jiwan Singh S/o Sh. Virender Singh R/o Shila Kiper P.O. Dudar Sadar
Mandi, H.P aged about 51 years presently working as Telecom
Technician Mandi under SDO (P) Mandi under transfer CSC, Tingrit
under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
Digitally
signed by 1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
MAMTA
WADHWA
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
2- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
... .Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika Kondal
3. Original Application No. 063/35/2025
Bhim Singh S/o Lt. Sh. Man Singh R/o Saini Mohari P.O. Alathu Sadar
Mandi, H.P aged about 50 years presently working as Telecom
Technician Sunder Nagar under SDO (T) Sunder Nagar under transfer
CSC, Killar under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
....... Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K.Thakur along with Ms. Monika Kondal
4. Original Application No. 063/36/2025
Kishan Chand S/o Lt. Sh. Doda Ram R/o VPO Samrahan, Tehsil Kotli,
Mandi, H.P aged about 52 years presently working as Telecom
Technician Mandi under SDO (T) Mandi under transfer CSC, Udaipur
under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
....... Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika Kondal
5. Original Application No. 063/37/2025
3- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
Pravinder Kumar S/o Lt. Sh. Kavinder Sharma R/o H. No. 128/10
Thaneda Mohalla, Mandi, H.P aged about 51 years presently working as
Telecom Technician Pandoh under SDO (T) Mandi under transfer CSC,
Manali under SDO (T) Manali, Distt. Kullu H.P
... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhii-110001
2. The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA
Complex, Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3. Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4. The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
....... Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur with Ms. Monika Kondal
6. Original Application No. 063/38/2025
Kamlesh Kumar S/o Lt. Sh. Govind Ram Rio VPO Sapnote Tehsil Karsog
Distt. Mandi, H.P aged about 50 years presently working as Telecom
Technician Karsog under SDO (T) Mandi under transfer CSC, Keylong
under SDO (T) Keylong, H.P
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2. The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA
Complex, Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3. Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4. The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
7. Original Application No. 063/39/2025
Jai Singh. S/o Lt. Sh. Tulsi Ram R/o Village Mandir Tanda, P.O. Dhaban
Tehsil Balh, Mandi, H.P aged about 51 years presently working as
Telecom Technician under SDO (T) Sunder Nagar, Mandi H.P. under
transfer CSC, Manali under SDO (T) Manali, Distt. Kullu H.P
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
4- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
8. Original Application No. 063/40/2025
Tej Singh S/o Sh. Bhekhi Ram R/o Village Panchjan P.O. Dul Tehsil
JoginderNagar, Mandi, H.P aged about 52 years presently working as
Assit. Telecom Technician Bararoo under SDO (T) JoginderNagar under
transfer CSC, Manali under SDO (T) Manali, Distt. Kullu H.P.
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2. The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA
Complex, Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3. Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4. The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
9. Original Application No. 063/41/2025
Anirudh S/o Lt. Sh. Ludar Mani R/o Village Matyal P.O. Kot (Tungal)
Tehsil Kotli, Mandi, H.P aged about 53 years presently working as
Telecom Technician Kot under SDO (T) Mandi under transfer CSC,
Koksar under SDO (T) Koksar H.P
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhii-110001
2. The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA
Complex, Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
5- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
3. Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4. The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
10. Original Application No. 063/42/2025
Roshan Lal S/o Sh. Khem Chand R/o Chowki Chandrahan P.O. Reur
Tehsil Balh, Mandi, H.P aged about 52 years presently working as
Telecom Technician Mandi under SDO (T) Mandi under transfer CSC,
Shansha under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
11. Original Application No. 063/44/2025
Kehar Singh S/o Lt. Sh. Mohan Singh R/o Village Dargyas P.O.
Thinagallu Tehsil Balh, Distt. Mandi, H.P aged about 51 years presently
working as Telecom Technician Mandi under SDO (T) Mandi under
transfer CSC, Darcha under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Shimla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4 The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
6- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
12. Original Application No. 063/45/2025
1. Trilok Singh S/o Sh. Bhikam Ram R/o Kashwara PO Salater, Tehsil
Kotli, Mandi, H.P aged about 49 years presently working as Assit.
Telecom Technician Kamand under SDO (T) Mandi under transfer CSC,
Killar under SDO (T) Keylong Distt. Lahul and Spiti H.P
2. Karam Chand S/o Sh. Bhagat Ram R/o Hayolage, P.O. Pahad Tehsil
Sarkaghat, Mandi, H.P aged about 53 years presently working as Aisst.
Telecom Technician under SDO (T) Dharampur, Mandi H.P. under
transfer CSC, Gondhla under SDO (T) Keylong, Distt. Lahul and Spiti H.P
3. Sunder Singh S/o Sh. Puran Chand R/o Village Balakrupi P.O. and
Tehsil Jogindernagar, Mandi, H.P aged about 53 years presently working
as Telecom Technician Jogindernagar under SDO (T) Jogindernagar
under transfer CSC, Jari under SDO (T) Bhunter, Distt. Kullu H.P
..... Applicants
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA Complex,
Kasaumpti, Sthemla-171009, H.P.
3 Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4. The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt. Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
13. Original Application No. 063/46/2025
Subhash Chand S/o Lt. Sh. Kanshi Ram R/o Village Bhaur P.О. Kanaid
Tehsil Sunder Nagar, Mandi, H.P aged about 53 years presently working
as Telecom Technician Sunder Nagar under SDO (T) Sunder Nagar
under transfer CSC, Sissu under SDO (T) Keylong H.P
..... Applicant
By Advocate: Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Managing Director,
8th floor, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110001
2. The Chief General Manager, Telecom (CGMT), Block-11, SDA
Complex, Kasaumpti, Shimla-171009, H.P.
3. Principal General Manager, Business Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P
4. The Sub Divisional Officer (T) (SDO), Area Mandi, Distt Mandi, H.P.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. K.K. Thakur along with Ms. Monika kondal
7- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
ORDER
Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA MEMBER (J):-
1. Since the issue involved, facts, relief claimed and grounds in support thereof are similar in all the above captioned Original Applications, therefore, these are disposed of by a common order, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. The detailed facts, for the sake of convenience and to avoid repetition, are extracted from O.A. No. 33/2025 and brief notes of other cases are added thereto. The relief claimed in these OAs is as under:-
"(i) The impugned transfer order dated 11/10/2024 (Annexure A6) qua the applicant and impugned order dated 26/12/2024 Annexure A-10 my kindly be set aside and quashed.
(ii) That after setting aside the Annexure A-6 and A-10, the respondents may be directed to permit the applicant to discharge his duty as TT at Karsog SDO (T) Karsog.
(iii) That the action of the respondent whereby the applicant has been ordered to be transferred from his recruitment unit (Mandi) to outside recruitment unit being contrary to rule 8 of transfer policy dated 07/05/2008 Annexure A-1, A-2 dated 27/08/2020 and Annexure A-11 dated 14/03/2024 may kindly be set aside and quashed."
2. The facts of the case (OA NO. 33/2025), in brief, are that the applicant was initially appointed as a Daily Rated Mazdoor on 10.07.1996 in the Secondary Switching Area (SSA) Recruitment Unit, Mandi, at Telephone Exchange, Karsog. He was thereafter placed as a Temporary Status Mazdoor (TSM) on 12.02.1999 and subsequently conferred the status of Regular Mazdoor on 30.06.2000. In the year 8- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 2012, he was transferred to Telephone Exchange, Seri Banglow, where he served till the year 2022, when he was shifted to Transmission Karsog, where he continues to work till date. When the applicant came to know that he had been transferred to Keylong under SDO (T) Keylong, he immediately submitted a representation dated 14.10.2024 requesting the respondent to cancel his transfer on the ground that his father, aged about 76 years, is paralyzed and suffers from 75% physical disability due to cerebral palsy, and his mother, aged 74 years, is also suffering from age-related ailments. Both his parents are entirely dependent on him, and transfer to a distant station at this stage would be detrimental to their well-being.
3. As the said representation remained unattended, the applicant along with others assailed the impugned transfer order dated 11.10.2024 before this Tribunal in O.A. No. 063/1304/2024 titled Anirudh and Others vs. BSNL and Others, wherein the present applicant was arrayed as applicant No. 8. The said Original Application was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 17.10.2024 directing the respondents to decide the representations, including that of the present applicant, in terms of the transfer policy dated 07.05.2008 as well as letters dated 27.08.2020 and 08.03.2021, within six weeks of receipt of the order. The competent authority was further directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with the contentions raised by the applicants and, till such decision, the applicants were to be allowed to work in the same capacity as on 11.10.2024. In compliance with the aforesaid direction, the respondent authorities passed the impugned order dated 26.12.2024 rejecting the representation of the applicant and justifying the transfer as being in 9- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 accordance with rules and in the interest of service. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant has approached this Tribunal seeking appropriate relief.
4. The applicant challenges the impugned orders dated 11.10.2024 and 26.12.2024 transferring him from Mandi SSA to Keylong (Kullu SSA), asserting multiple grounds of illegality and violation of BSNL‟s transfer policy. He contends that his case was wrongly rejected by the respondent on the ground that he does not fall under the health/illness exemption clause, though his claim was based on being the caregiver of his 76-year-old paralyzed father (75% permanent disability) and aged ailing mother. As per Section 2(d) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and clause 6(i) of the amended BSNL Transfer Policy dated 14.03.2024, caregivers of dependent disabled parents are exempt from routine/rotational transfers. The rejection order thus suffers from non-application of mind and misinterpretation of his representation. The applicant relies on the Supreme Court judgment in Rajinder Roy v. Union of India (1993) 1 SCC 148, which mandates consideration of employees‟ personal hardships. He argues that his transfer, despite his role as caregiver, violates this principle and lacks genuine administrative exigency.
5. The applicant further submitted that the transfer has been justified on grounds of staffing shortage in Kullu, but the BSNL transfer policy (clause 13) requires that for unpopular/tenure stations, volunteers must first be invited, and only employees with the longest stay should be transferred, if volunteers are unavailable. No such willingness was called from him, and other employees with longer stay were retained, 10- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 while he, with shorter tenure, was picked for transfer. Moreover, despite alleging staff shortage, BSNL simultaneously transferred other non-executives from Kullu to Mandi, which contradicts their stated justification.
6. The applicant further pointed out that under clause 8 of the 2008 Transfer Policy and subsequent circulars (Annexure A2 & A3), transfer outside one‟s recruitment unit is generally prohibited unless by mutual consent or on request, which he never gave. Even after consolidation of Business Areas in 2020, the transfer liability of SSA cadre staff remained unchanged; hence, transfer from Mandi SSA to Kullu SSA is impermissible. The stay/gradation list (Annexure A8) was also not prepared correctly, omitting service details of employees with far longer stays who were retained, showing clear discrimination. The applicant, having aged 52, has served only two years at Karsog Transmission and has not completed the minimum seat/section tenure of four years, making his transfer premature and contrary to clause 13 of the policy. He therefore submits that the orders have been passed in violation of BSNL‟s own transfer policy, without calling for willingness, ignoring the exemption applicable to caregivers, and disregarding his genuine family hardship. The impugned orders are arbitrary, discriminatory, non-speaking, and contrary to natural justice and the directions of the Tribunal in O.A. No. 063/1304/2024, and thus liable to be quashed.
7. The applicant in O.A. No. 34/2025, Jiwan Singh, aged about 51 years, presently working as Telecom Technician at Mandi under SDO (P) Mandi, has been ordered to be transferred to CSC Tingrit under 11- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 SDO (T) Keylong, Himachal Pradesh, as reflected from the records. The applicant stated that he is a chronic diabetic (sugar patient) and his parents, aged about 75 and 72 years respectively, are suffering from age-related ailments and are dependent upon him for their care and support. It has been further submitted that both of his children are presently studying in Government Degree College, Mandi, and shifting to a distant and difficult station at this stage would cause serious hardship to his family. The applicant asserted that he has already rendered service for about eight years in a hard area, while posted at Telephone Exchange, Balu and yet again he has been subjected to transfer to another hard and difficult location. He claims protection under Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy (Annexure A-
1), contending that he is a caregiver to his dependent aged parents and therefore, is exempted from the routine or rotational transfer exercise.
8. The applicant in O.A. No. 35/2025, Bhim Singh, aged about 50 years, is presently working in the MM Store under SDO (P) Sundernagar and has been ordered to be transferred to Killar under SDO (T) Keylong vide impugned orders, as reflected from Annexures A-7 and A-12. The applicant submitted that he has been suffering from a disease affecting his mobility and physical condition and, therefore, falls within the definition of a person with disability under Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. It is further stated that his mother, about 90 years of age, is unable to walk, and there is no other family member available to look after her, due to which he is the sole caregiver. He thus qualifies as a caregiver as defined under Section 2(d) of the said Act. On this basis, the applicant claims that his 12- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 case is squarely covered under Clause 6(h) and 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy (Annexure A-1), which specifically provide that employees who are persons with disabilities, as well as those who are caregivers of dependent persons with disabilities, shall be exempted from routine or rotational transfers and should be permitted to continue in the same post ,so that, they may achieve optimum performance.
8. The applicant in O.A. No. 36/2025, Kishan Chand, aged 52 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Mandi under SDO (T), Mandi. He has been transferred to CSC, Udaipur under SDO (T), Keylong, H.P. vide the impugned order, within a short span of 1 year and 9 months of his present posting. It has been stated that the wife of the applicant, as per Annexure A-12, is suffering from a medical condition of severe cracked heels and the extreme cold climatic conditions of Udaipur would adversely affect her health and may prove fatal. It is therefore submitted that the applicant falls within the category of a person with disability under Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and thus is entitled to exemption from rotational transfer under the applicable Transfer Policy. It is further contended that as per Clause 6(h) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, such employees are to be protected from displacement and allowed to continue at the same station to achieve the desired results. Accordingly, the applicant seeks retention at his present place of posting on humanitarian and statutory grounds.
13- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
9. The applicant in O.A. No. 37/2025, Pravin Der Kumar, aged 51 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Pandoh under SDO (T), Mandi. He has been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Manali under SDO (T), Manali, District Kullu, H.P. It has been stated that in May 2014 the applicant suffered a massive heart attack and survived due to immediate medical intervention at Zonal Hospital, Mandi and IGMC Shimla. He continues to receive regular medical treatment from Lal Bahadur Medical College, Ner Chowk, and the treating doctors have advised him to avoid posting at high altitude locations. It is, therefore, submitted that the applicant falls within the definition of a person with disability under Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and is accordingly entitled to exemption from rotational transfer. It is further contended that as per Clause 6(h) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, such employees require protection from displacement and should be allowed to continue at the same station, where they can perform their duties effectively. On these grounds, the applicant seeks retention at his present place of posting in Pandoh on medical and humanitarian considerations.
10. The applicant in O.A. No. 38/2025, Kamlesh Kumar, aged 50 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Karsog under SDO (T), Mandi, and has been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Keylong under SDO (T), Keylong, H.P. it has been stated that the applicant is a patient of lung function impairment and is receiving regular treatment from IGMC, Shimla for pleurodesis. His posting at the transfer station located at Keylong, being a high-altitude and climatically harsh area, will be fatal to his health condition. Thus, the 14- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 applicant falls in the category of a person with disability as defined under Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and is, therefore, exempted from rotational transfer. As per Clause 6(h) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, he is entitled to protection from such transfer and should be permitted to continue at the same place of posting where he can effectively discharge his duties.
11. The applicant in O.A. No. 39/2025, Jai Singh, aged 52 years, is presently working as Telecom Technician under SDO (T), Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P., and has now been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Manali under SDO (T), Manali, District Kullu, H.P. It is stated that the applicant has been transferred within a short span of 1 year and 7 months, despite the fact that he has already rendered service in a hard area in the past. He further submitted that his mother, aged about 75 years, is a heart patient and is undergoing regular medical treatment (Annexure A-12). He contended that he falls in the category of caregiver, therefore, is entitled to exemption from rotational transfer. Accordingly, in terms of Clause 6(h) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, he claims the right to continue at the existing place of posting where he is able to perform his duties efficiently.
12. The applicant in O.A. No. 40/2025, Tej Singh, aged 52 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Bararoo under SDO (T), Joginder Nagar, and has now been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Manali under SDO (T), Manali, District Kullu, H.P. It is submitted that the applicant has been transferred within a short span of 4 years and 4 15- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 months. The applicant states that his wife is a heart patient and is under constant medical treatment requiring regular monthly check-ups, and there is no other family member available to take care of her. The applicant contends that he is the sole caregiver and therefore falls within the protection granted under Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, which exempts caregivers from routine or rotational transfers. Accordingly, he asserts his right to be retained at the present place of posting in order to provide necessary support and care to his dependent spouse.
13. The applicant in O.A. No. 41/2025, Anirudh, aged 53 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Mandi under SDO (T) Mandi, and has now been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Koksar under SDO (T), Koksar, H.P. It is submitted that the applicant has been transferred within a short span of less than two years. The father of the applicant, aged 76 years, is suffering from age-related ailments and has been rendered totally bedridden due to an acute paralytic condition, for which the Medical Board at Mandi has assessed 75% permanent physical impairment of disability. The mother of the applicant, aged 74 years, is also suffering from age-related ailments and both parents require continuous care and support. The applicant asserts that he is the sole caregiver within the meaning of Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, which exempts caregivers from the routine exercise of rotational or transfer postings, and therefore seeks protection from the impugned transfer.
16- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
14. The applicant in O.A. No. 42/2025, Roshan Lal, aged 32 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Mandi under SDO (T) Mandi, and has now been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Shansha under SDO (T), Keylong, H.P. The applicant submits that his minor son has been undergoing treatment since 2023 at PGI Chandigarh for injuries sustained due to a fall, and requires constant medical attention. It is further submitted that the mother of the applicant, aged 75 years, is also suffering from age-related ailments and there is no other family member available to look after them. The applicant contends that he is the sole caregiver and thus falls within the ambit of Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, which provides exemption from routine or rotational transfers. Accordingly, he asserts his right to be retained at the present station.
15. The applicant in O.A. No. 44/2025, Kehar Singh, aged 51 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Mandi under SDO (T), Mandi, and has been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Darcha under SDO (T), Keylong, H.P. It has been stated that the son of the applicant, Master Deepak Kumar, is a physically challenged person having locomotive disability of 30% and an overall physical impairment assessed at 42%. The applicant submits that he is the sole caregiver responsible for the day-to-day support and care of his disabled child. He therefore contends that he falls within the category of caregiver as defined in Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, which exempts caregivers from the routine exercise of rotational transfers. On this basis, he seeks retention at his current place of posting.
17- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
16. The applicants in O.A. No. 45/2025, namely Tirlok Singh, aged 49 years, Karam Chand, aged 53 years, and Sundar Singh, aged 53 years, have challenged their respective transfer orders issued by the respondents. The applicant Tirlok Singh is presently working as an ATT at Kamand under SDO (T), Mandi, and has been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Killar under SDO (T), Keylong, District Lahaul and Spiti, H.P. It has been submitted that the applicant has been wrongly shown as IT in the impugned transfer order, whereas he is actually working as ATT, and has been stagnating on the same post for the last 24 years. He has already served in a hard area while posted at Telephone Exchange, Gada Gosain, and has again been posted to a tribal and climatically difficult area. He has aged and ailing parents and his children are studying in higher classes, requiring his presence and care. He asserted that he is a caregiver under Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1 and is exempted from the routine rotational transfer policy.
(i) The second applicant, Karam Chand, aged 53 years, is presently working as an Assistant Telecom Technician under SDO (T), Dharampur, Mandi, and has been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Gondhla under SDO (T), Keylong, District Lahaul and Spiti, H.P. His mother is 90 years old and is suffering from age- related ailments, and his wife is a patient of cardiovascular disease, both of whom require constant medical attention and continuous supervision. He is the sole caregiver and therefore falls within the protection granted under Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy which exempts caregivers from the exercise of rotational transfers.
18- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
(ii) The third applicant, Sundar Singh, aged 53 years, is presently working as Telecom Technician under SDO (T), Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, and has been ordered to be transferred to CSC, Jari under SDO (T), Bhuntar, District Kullu, H.P. His children are studying in career-building classes at Government Degree College, Joginder Nagar, and his daughter is preparing for the NEET examination, requiring stability and parental support at this crucial stage. It has been contended that he is also a caregiver within the meaning of Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, which provides exemption from routine or rotational transfer. Accordingly, he seeks retention at the present place of posting.
17. The applicant in O.A. No. 46/2025, Subhash Chand, aged 51 years, is presently working as a Telecom Technician at Mandi under SDO (T) Mandi, and has been ordered to be transferred to Katrain under SDO (T), Manali, District Kullu, H.P. It has been stated that he has been transferred within a short span of less than two years. The mother of the applicant, aged 86 years, is suffering from age-related ailments and requires constant care and support, and there is no other member available in the family to attend to her needs. He submitted that he is the sole caregiver to his dependent mother and is therefore entitled to exemption under Clause 6(i) of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy contained in Annexure A-1, which exempts caregivers from routine or rotational transfer. He accordingly seeks retention at the present place of posting.
19- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
18. The respondents filed written statement contesting the claim of the applicant. It has been stated therein that the transfer orders were issued to address the acute shortage of non-executive staff in the Kullu Operational Area (formerly SSA), as repeatedly reported by the DGM Kullu. The transfers from Mandi OA were essential to ensure operational efficiency, uninterrupted services, and growth of BSNL business and revenue, in accordance with Clauses 3 and 7 of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy (Annexure R-1). The DGM Kullu had highlighted that the shortage of staff severely affected BSNL‟s ability to maintain services, particularly in remote and tribal areas such as Lahaul and Pangi, where several new 4G BTS towers under the 4G Saturation and Phase IX.2 projects have been installed or are under installation. These sites require dedicated staff for operation, maintenance, and marketing. Additionally, important NFS nodes at Koksar, Sissu, and Darcha need round-the-clock manning as they serve strategic locations. The respondents further state that Mandi BA currently has surplus non-executive staff due to the closure of several exchanges and restructuring measures, and redeployment to Kullu OA will balance staffing needs. The construction of new Optical Fiber Cable (OFC) routes in Kullu OA also necessitates the posting of maintenance staff. The respondents explain that many non-executive employees were earlier transferred out of Kullu SSA under Rule 8, creating an imbalance that now requires correction. The transfer orders are therefore justified as an administrative measure to maintain service quality and operational continuity. Both Mandi OA and Kullu OA form part of Mandi Business Area, headed by the GM BA Mandi, who is competent to order such transfers within his jurisdiction. The 20- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 respondents emphasize that as per Clauses 3 and 7 of the BSNL Transfer Policy, the management retains the right to move employees between locations and roles as per business needs, and exemptions from transfer apply only to employees aged 55 years or above, those with permanent disabilities, or medical emergencies. The transferred employees, they contend, have been posted only where their presence is critically required to maintain essential telecom operations.
19. The applicant filed rejoinder, denying the respondents‟ claim that the impugned transfer orders (Annexures A-6 dated 11.10.2024 and A- 10 dated 26.12.2024) were issued to meet staff shortages in Kullu. He contended that there is no acute shortage, as Kullu SSA with 384 towers has about 45 non-executive staff, which is proportionate compared to Mandi SSA having 62 staff for 680 towers. The applicant further stated that tower construction, maintenance, and related services are handled by Tata Consultancy Services and private vendors, making BSNL staff deployment unnecessary. He pointed out that BSNL itself transferred a telecom technician from Kullu to Mandi (Annexure A13), contradicting the shortage plea, and that outsourced local workers are already engaged in the tribal areas, rendering the respondents‟ justification baseless.
20. I have gone through the pleadings, perused the material available on record and considered the rival submission of both the sides.
21. It is an undisputed position on record that all the applicants in these connected Original Applications are non-executive employees of BSNL working in different units under the Mandi Business Area and 21- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 were subjected to transfer orders dated 11.10.2024, whereby they have been directed to be shifted from their existing postings within Mandi SSA to various stations falling under Kullu/Keylong Operational Area, including difficult, tribal and high-altitude locations such as Keylong, Killar, Gondhla, Darcha, Udaipur, Koksar, Shansha, Jari and Manali. It is also undisputed that the applicants have filed their representations immediately upon issuance of the impugned transfer orders dated 11.10.2024 and the same were directed to be considered by the competent authority pursuant to the order dated 17.10.2024 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 063/1304/2024 titled Anirudh and Others vs. BSNL and Others. It is further admitted that the representations of all applicants were rejected by a common non- speaking order dated 26.12.2024, maintaining the transfers on the ground of administrative exigency and alleged shortage of manpower in Kullu/Keylong region. It is also not in dispute that family members of several of the applicants are suffering from serious medical conditions, some fall in the category of persons with disabilities under Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, or several applicants are primary caregivers to disabled dependents, aged parents or chronically ill family members, and that the BSNL Transfer Policy dated 14.03.2024 (Annexure A-11) contains express provisions under Clause 6(h) and Clause 6(i) exempting such categories from routine and rotational transfers. The respondents have amended the said clauses of the earlier BSNL Employees Policy dated 24.11.2014 and 07.04.2016 in supersession thereto providing exemption of employee from routine/rotational transfer. The fact that a number of applicants have already served earlier in hard/tribal areas and that some of them 22- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 have been transferred within a short span of less than two years is also undisputed. It is not disputed that the applicants belong to Mandi SSA, which is their parent recruitment unit, and that transfer outside one‟s recruitment unit is ordinarily prohibited except on request or mutual consent, as provided in Clause 8 of the BSNL Transfer Policy dated 07.05.2008. There is no dispute that no willingness or option was called for, nor was any stay/longest-stay list applied in selecting the transferees.
22. The primary question for determination in these OAs, is whether the impugned transfer was issued in accordance with transfer policy and whether the respondents have properly considered the applicants‟ claim for exemption as a caregiver to a disabled dependent, as well as whether the principle of longest-stay and prohibition on transfer outside recruitment unit has been adhered to.
23. On examination of the speaking order dated 26.12.2024, it emerges that the respondents have only referred generally to administrative exigency and the need to balance manpower, without any discussion regarding applicability of amendment to Clause 6(i) of the Transfer Policy dated 14.03.2024. The respondents appear to have treated the applicant‟s request as one seeking medical exemption for himself rather than exemption as a caregiver, which is a distinct category recognized both under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and the amended BSNL Transfer Policy. The details relating to applicant‟s parents disability and dependency, supported by medical documents, have not been dealt with at all. A speaking order requires due examination of core issues raised; its absence renders the order 23- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 unsustainable. Thus, the rejection order suffers from non-application of mind, contrary to the directions of this Tribunal issued on 17.10.2024.
24. Regarding violation of Clause 8 of the Transfer Policy dated 07.05.2008, the respondents have not demonstrated any material to indicate that the applicant was transferred outside his SSA either on request or by mutual consent. Merely stating that Mandi and Kullu fall within the same Business Area does not cure the statutory restriction applicable to recruitment-unit cadre employees. The policy clearly mandates that SSA cadre staff ordinarily cannot be transferred outside their recruitment unit.
25. There is no rebuttal by the respondents to applicant‟s plea that SSA Kull had adequate staff as the SSA Mandi has 680 Towers and the strength of non-executive staff is about 62, while in SSA Kullu there are 384 towers and there are about 45 non-executives. It appears that to satisfy the claim of other employees under Rule 8, the applicants have been transferred/adjusted.
25. On the issue of longest-stay principle under Clause 13, the respondents have not produced any tenure/gradation list nor explained why the applicant was chosen for transfer in disregard of senior employees with longer stay. The speaking order is silent on this aspect. Selective application of transfer policy or arbitrary picking of individuals defeats the purpose of a structured tenure policy and offends Article 14 of the Constitution. When volunteers were not called and justification of tenure-based selection is absent, the transfer cannot be defended as a fair administrative measure.
24- O.A. No. 063/33/2025
26. Dealing with the contention raised by the respondents that the transfer orders have been passed strictly in accordance with Clauses 3 and 7 of the BSNL Employees Transfer Policy empowering the department to post employees anywhere in the interest of service, it is observed that while the employer undoubtedly retains the prerogative to transfer its employees on grounds of administrative exigency, such power is not unfettered and must be exercised in conformity with the procedure, safeguards and limitations prescribed in the very transfer policy relied upon by the respondents. Even assuming that there was a staffing requirement in Kullu/Keylong SSA and redistribution of manpower was necessary, the BSNL Transfer Policy expressly mandates that before effecting compulsory transfers, willingness should first be invited from employees, and in the absence of volunteers, the principle of longest stayee must be applied by preparing a proper and transparent gradation list, as well as by adhering to exemptions provided for persons with disabilities and caregivers under Clause 6(h) and 6(i). In the present case, the respondents have not produced any material to show compliance with these mandatory procedural requirements. No willingness was sought, no proper seniority or longest-stay list was drawn, and several employees with longer tenure were retained while those with comparatively shorter stay and protected categories have been selectively transferred. The respondents are not permitted in law to pick and choose or arbitrarily single out certain individuals under the guise of administrative exigency. Thus, the plea that the transfer is justified merely because the management has the power to move employees anywhere cannot sustain when the basic procedural 25- O.A. No. 063/33/2025 disciplines mandated there in the policy itself have been ignored. From the perusal of various transfer orders including the latest dated 30.09.2025, it is seen that some of the TT have been transferred from Kullu OA to other OA, viz. Sundar Nagar, Hamirpur, which is contradictory to the plea of shortage of staff by the respondents.
27. In light of the deficiencies identified, including failure to consider relevant clauses of the transfer policy, erroneous interpretation of the applicant‟s exemption claim, ignoring longest-stay principle, violation of restrictions on transfer outside recruitment unit, and non-compliance with the Tribunal‟s earlier directions, the impugned orders are arbitrary, discriminatory and unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the Original Application is allowed. The impugned transfer order dated 11.10.2024 and speaking order dated 26.12.2024 are quashed and set aside. The respondents may go ahead with the transfers strictly in accordance with the applicable transfer policy and after due consideration of entitlement to exemption as caregiver to the eligible candidates. There shall be no order as to costs.
(SURESH KUMAR BATRA) MEMBER (J) Dated: 27.11.2025 „mw‟