Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Calcutta Telephone Contractors ... vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 7 April, 2025
1
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
OA No.670/2023
MA No.1917/2023
Order reserved on: 28.02.2025
Order pronounced on: 07.0
04.2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)
1. Calcutta Telephone Contractors' Mazdoor Sangh, having
its office at 10, kiran Shankar Roy Road, Kolkata
Kolkata- 700001
represented by General Secretary.
2. Shri Bivas Kumar Das, (General Secretary, Calcutta
Telephone Contractors' Mazdoor Sangh), son of Bimal
Kumar Das, residing a
att 178, Netaji Subhas Road, Howrah,
PIN
PIN-711101.
3. Shri Debmalya Mitra, son of Late Dulal Mitra, residing at
Flat No.
No.-7,
7, Balaji Enclave, Moran Road, Gondalpara,
Chandannagore, PIN
PIN-712137.
712137. Hooghly,
4. Shri Jayanta Ghosh, son of. Ranjit Kr. Ghosh, residing at
685
685-BL-'O'
'O' S.S.D. Camp, New Alipore, Kolkata 700053.
5. Sk. Abdur Rezzak, son of late Abdul Salam, residing at
Vill -China, Post-Hatni,
Hatni, District-
District Hooghly, P.S. Pandua, PIN
- 712134.
6. Shri Subasis Ganguly, son of Late Debasis Ganguly,
residing at 4, Sumangalapuri, Old Calcutta Road,
Barrackpore, Post Talpukur, P.S.-Titagarh,
P.S. PIN-- 700123.
7. Shri Sukhen Chanda, son of Sambhu Nath Chanda,
residing at A
A-33,
33, Purbayan, Sodepur, Kolkata - 700110.
8. Shri Samir Halder, son of Haripada Halder, residing
att 18, Chandicharan Ghosh Road, Barisa, Kolkata 700008.
2
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
9. Shri Suman Acharjee, son of late Sukhendra Chandra
Acharya, residing at P.O.+ P.S. -Barasat,
Barasat, Banamalipur (W),
North 24
24-Parganas, PIN- 700124.
10. Shri Sajal Kumar Sarkar, son of Late Nripen Chandr
Chandra
Sarkar, residing at D/30, New Patuli, Post Panchasayar
(Baghajatin), Kolkata -700094.
700094.
11. Shri Shyamal Samanta, son of Late Fatick Chandra
Samanta, residing at Vill.+Post Ghosh Pur, P.S.
P.S.- Amta,
Dist.
Dist.-Howrah, PIN- 711401,
12. Shri Ajit Kumar Ray, son of Narayan Ch. Ray, residing
at Vill. +P.O. + P.S. Bamangola, Dist.-
Dist. Malda, PINPIN-
73213863.
13. Shri Shrikanta Samanta, son of Pannalal Samanta,
residing at Vill
Vill- Bhataghory, Thalya, 711401. Howrah, PIN
PIN-
14. Shri Naba Kumar Pakira, son of Panchu Gopal PakiraPakira,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Champsara,
Champsara, P.O.-Mohistikari,
P.O. Mohistikari, P.S.
P.S.-
Haripal, Dist.
Dist.-Hooghly,
Hooghly, PIN - 712223
15. Shri Tapas Kumar Gayen, son of Radha Nath Gayen,
residing at Vill
Vill- Krishorepore, P.O.-
P.O. Gotalhut, Krishnapur,
P.S. Bishnupur, District - South 24 Paraganas, PIN PIN-
743503.
16. Shri Dilip Kumar Pattanayak, son of Pashupati
Pattanayak, residing at 32/1, Murari Pukur Road, P.S
Maniktala, Post Ultadanga, Kolkata-
Kolkata 700067.
17. Shri Swapan Mondal, son of Sudhir Mondal, residing at
(Rashpunja), South 24
24- Parganas, Kolkata-700104.
Kolkata 700104.
18. Shri Alok Majumder, son of Ramananda Majumder,
residing at Vill.+P.O. Gurudaspur, South 24
24- Parganas,
PIN
PIN-7433.49.
19. Shri Pranab Mondal, son of Adhir Mondal, residing at
Ramnagarchar, Santipur, District Nadia, PIN 741404
20. Shri Soumendra Mistry, son of Manaranjan Mistry,
residing at Ramnagarchar, Santipur, District Nadia, PIN
PIN-
741404.
3
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
21. Shri Haradhan Sadhukhan.son of Gadadhar
Sadhukhan, residing at 107/125, Chandra Master Road,
Posi
Posi-Nonachandan
Nonachandan Pukur, Barrackpore, North 24 24-
Parg
Parganas, PIN-700122.
22. Shri Laltu Mondal, son of Ramen Mondal, residing at
Vill.
Vill.-Hirgore,
Hirgore, Mondal Para (Laxminarayanpur), P.O.
P.O.-Bansra,
P.S. Jibandtala, Dist.
Dist.-South
South 24-Parganas,
24 PIN-743363.
743363.
23. Shri Buddhadeb Ghosh, son of Late Biswanath Ghosh,
residing at Vill.+Post- Khatora, P.S. Domjur, Howrah, PIN
PIN-
711411.
24. Shri Ajit Kumar Maity, son of Balai Chandra Maity,
residing at Vill. Sastitala, Post Sapuipara, P.S.
P.S.-Bally,
Howrah, PIN
PIN-711227.
25. Shri Anshuman Das, son of Dayamay Das, residing at
Chakraborty P
Para
ara Road, Segun Bagan, Ward No.6, P.S. Post
Baruipur, Koikata
Koikata-700144
700144
26. Shri Jeet Bahadur Thakur, son of Bilas Thakur,
residing at 14, Uma Das Lane, Post - Parkstreet, P.S.
P.S.-New
Market, Koikata
Koikata-700016
27. Shri Uttam Barik, son of Kalicharan Barik, residi
residing at
Vill. Bheribaranga, Post-
Post Uttar Gavindapur, Dist.Dist.-
Midnapur (East), P.S.
P.S.- Ramnagar, PIN-721453.
PIN
28. Shri Nirmal Chattopadhyay, son of Panchanan
Chattopadhyay, residing at Vill.+Post-Kanuibanka,
Vill.+Post Kanuibanka, District
-Hooghly,
Hooghly, PIN
PIN- 712301.
29. Shri Chanchal Bairagi,
Bairagi, son of Dhananjoy Bairagi,
residing at Vili.
Vili.-62,
62, Purba Huda, Kaniara 1, Bagdaha,
North 24
24-Parganas,
Parganas, PIN 743251.
30. Shri Goutam Mullick, son of Late Yousuf Mullick,
residing at 156/1, Maharaja Nanda Kumar Road,
Ramkrishnapur Apartment, FL-C309,
FL Kolkata-700036.
700036.
31. Shri Tarak Nath Halder, son of Late Rabiram Halder,
residing at Vill+Post Dhanpota, P.S. Mograhat, Dist.
Dist.-South
24-Parganas,
Parganas, PIN
PIN-743355.
743355.
4
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
32. Shri Bhadreshwor Mondal, son of Late Madan Mondal,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Nayapukur,
Nayapukur, P.S, Baruipur, Post
Post- Kalinagar,
Dist. South 24
24- Parganas, PIN-743610
PIN
33. Shri Hare Krishna Sarkar, son of Haripada Sarkar,
residing at Kadihati Adarsa Pally, Post Ganti Via
Ganganagar, P.S.
P.S.- Naranpur, PIN-700132.
PIN
34. Shri Anil Santra, son of Lakshman Santra, residing at
3/8, Promadgarh, P.O.-
P.O. Gouranagar, Rajarhat, PIN
PIN-
700159.
35. Shri Pradip Debnath, son of Late Sunil Debnath,
residing at 2 No. Durganagar, P.S.-
P.S. Chakdaha, Dist.
Dist.-Nadia,
PIN
PIN- 741222,
36. Shri Makhanlal Maity, son of Baneshwar Maity,
residing at Vill.
Vill.- Kihetrapal,
etrapal, Post - Balya Gobindapur,
Patashpur, P.S.
P.S.- District Midnapur (East), PIN-
PIN 721440.
37. Shri Mukul Maity, son of Gobinda Maity, residing at
Raghunathpur, Rangilabad, Usthi, South 24 24-Parganas,
PIN
PIN-743609.
38. Shri Debasish Lodh, son of Chunilal Lodh,
Lodh, residing at
Kumar Road, Ramkrishnapur Apartment, FL FL-C309,
Kolkata
Kolkata-700036
39. Shri Samir Halder, son of Binay Holder, residing at
Vill.+Post
Vill.+Post-Dhanpota,
Dhanpota, P.S.-
P.S. Mograhat, Dist.--South 24-
Parganas, PIN
PIN-743355,
40. Shri Paritosh Mondal, son of Banamali Mondal
Mondal, residing
at Vill.+Post
Vill.+Post-Dhanpota,
Dhanpota, P.S.-
P.S. Mograhat, Dist.
Dist.-South 24-
Parganas, PIN
PIN-743355.
41. Shri Swapan Kumar Das, son of Late Biswanath Das,
residing at 138,R.B. Avenue, post-
post Bhadreswar, Hooghly,
PIN
PIN-712124
42. Shri Mahesh Thapa, son of Dilbahadur Tha
Thapa, residing
at PP-155/L,
155/L, Mudiali Road, Post Gardenreach, Kolkaa
Kolkaa-
700024.
5
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
43. Shri Manik Poddar, son of Monindra Poddar, residing at
34, Purba Baghajatin, 700086. Phulbagan, Kolkata
44. Shri Debdulal Bairagı, son of Narendra Nath Bairagi,
residing at Vill
Vill.. Purbakaiiiar Pukuria,; P.O.-
P.O. Urelchandpur,
P,S. Magrahat, District -South
South 24-Parganas,
24 Parganas, PIN - 743355.
45. Shri Biju Patra, son of Dulal Patra, residing at Q/101,
Simpukur Lane, PostPost- Gardenreach, Kolkata 700024,
District South 24 Parganas.
46. Shri Subi
Subirr Bhadra, son of Binod Bihari Bhadra,
residing at 86, Purba Phool Bagan, Post Baghajatin, P.S. -
Patuli, Kolkata 700086.
47. Shri Bhanu Gayen, son of Mukta Ram Gayen, residing
Gayen Para, Banbene, Shikhar Bali, South 24
24- Parganas,
PIN
PIN-743387.
48. Shri Biswajit Roy, son of Shambhunath Roy, residing at
Vill.+Post Ghateswar, P.S. Dhubulia, Dist.-Nadia,
Dist. Nadia, PIN
PIN-
741139
49. Shri Aloke Santra, son of Nirapada Santra, residing at
Aimachampsara, Post Mohistikri, P.S.-Haripal,
P.S. Haripal, Dist.
Dist.-
Hooghly, PIN -712223
50. Shri Pu
Pulak
lak Santra, son of Nirapada Santra, residing at
Aimachapsara, Post Mohistikri, P.S.-Haripal,
P.S. Haripal, Dist.
Dist.-Hooghly,
PIN -712223
51. Shri Samim Aktar, son of Md. Altaf Ali, residing at
Vill.+Post Furfura, P.S.
P.S.-- Jangipara, PIN-712706
712706 Dist.
Dist.-
Hooghly,
52. Shri Dilip Bairagi, son of Dhananjoy Bairagi, residing at
Vill--Purba
Purba Huda, P.O. Baliadanga, P.S.-Bagdah,
P.S. Bagdah, North 2424-
Parganas, PIN
PIN- 743251.
53. Shri Bablu Kumar Ghosh, son of Late Pulin Ghosh,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Chandkhali,
Chandkhali, Post. Kumarhat, P.S.
P.S.-
Baruipur, Dist.
Dist.-South 24-- Parganas, PIN-743387.
743387.
6
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
54. Shri Samir Bala, son of Baidhyanath Bala, residing at
Vill,+Post Khola,..Dist.
Khola,..Dist.-North
North Kumar 24-
24 Parganas, P.S.
P.S.-
Bagdoz, PIN
PIN- 743270.
55. Shri Dilip Naskar, son of Shaktipada Naskar, residing
at Vill.
Vill.-Earagram,
Earagram, Post Gotalahat, P.S.-
P Bisnupur, Dist.
Dist.-
South 24
24-Parganas, PIN-743503.
743503.
56. Shri Biswajit Banerjee, son of Nani Gopal Banerjee,
residing at Vill.+Post Belpukur, Dist.-Nadia,
Dist. Nadia, PIN
PIN- 741125.
57. Shri Sudip Mukherjee, son of Prasanta Mukherjee,
residing at Kanakshally, 206, Jora Pukur Road, Chinsura,
Hooghly, PIN
PIN-712105
58. Shri Sanjib Chakraborty, son of Ram Chakraborty,
residing at 140, Ballavpur Thakurbari Street, Srirampur,
Hooghly, PIN
PIN- 712201,
59. Shri Ardhendu Adhikary, son of Shashadhar Adhikarty,
residing at Vill.
Vill.- Brindabanchak,
ndabanchak, P.S.-Moyna,
P.S. Moyna, Post -
Srikantha, Di'st.
Di'st.- Midnapur (East), PIN-
PIN 721629.
60. Shri Manash Halder, son of Manoj Halder, residing at
Sherpur Nayasarai, Hooghly, PIN-712513.
PIN
61. Shri Debasish Ghorai, son of. Nitai Ghorai, resding at
114/202, N. Bidhan Palli, Pati Pukur, P.O. Shree Bhumi,
P.S.
P.S.-Lake
Lake Town, Kolkata 700048.
62. Shri Partha Mal, son of Dulu Mal, residing at
Akhanbazar Rammandir, Daktargali, Chinsurah, Hooghly,
PIN 712101
63. Shri Prabir Kumar Goswami, son of Sasthi Prasad
Goowami, residing a
at Vill-- Karui (Paschimpara), Post Karui,
Madhabitala, Katwa, Dist. Burdwan, PIN-
PIN
64. Sk. Rafikul Islam, son of Md. Ebadali, residing at
Kanur, Post Ilsoba Monolai, Dist.-
Dist. Hooghly, P.S.
P.S.-Pandua,
PIN - 712749.
65. Shri Manik Malik, son of Nade Malik, residi
residing at
Vill.+Post Banharishpur, P.S. Panchla, Howrah, PIN
PIN-
711322
7
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
66. Shri Swaraj Mukherjee, son of Sujal Mukherjee,
residing at Vill
Vill- Prasasther sarder Para, Post-
Post Prasasther,
District
District- Howrah, P.S.- Domjur, PIN-711302.
PIN
67. Shri Robin Das, son of Lalit Das, Das, residing at
Shantipally, Sonatuli, Chinsura, Hooghly, PIN-712103
PIN 712103
68. Shri Jayanta Das,
son of Haradhan Das,
residing at 19, Kabi Bharatcharidra Road, Hatkhola,
Chalke Para, Chandannagores Hooghly - 712136.
69. Sk. Najrul Haque,
son of Late Sk. Muj
Mujit,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Barmoberi
Barmoberi Dabghanga, Post Pirpur,
Uluberia, Howrah, PINPIN-711303
711303
70. Shri Somnath Sarder,
son of Late Kartick Sarder,
residing at Vill.+Post Hotor, P.S. - Mograhat, Dist. -South
24- Parganas, PIN - 743610.
71. Shri Kamal Mazumder,
son of Late Subodh Mazumder,
residing at Bonomalipur, Post Barasat, North 24
24- Parganas,
PIN
PIN-700124.
72. Shri Debabrata. Patra,
son of Swapan Kr. Patra,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-AymaChampsara,,
AymaChampsara,, Post Mohistikari, P.S.
P.S.-
Haripal, Dist.
Dist.-Hooghly,
Hooghly, PIN - 712223.
73. Shri Samir Naskar,
son of Late Narayah Ch. Naskar,
residing at Jagadishpur, Post-
Post Sonarpur, Dist.
Dist.-South 24-
Parganas, PIN - 700150.
74. Shri Samir Das,
son of Late Rasbihari Das,
residing at 132/H/21, Beleghata Main Road, Kolkata -
700010.
75. Shri Amar Sardar,
son of Late Manik Chandra Sardar,
8
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Hirapur
Hirapur Kamar Para, Post Hirapur Bazar,
P.S.
P.S.-Sankrail,
Sankrail, Howrah, PIN-711310.
PIN
76. Shri Biswanath Naskar,
son of Bijay Naskar,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Raghunathpur,
Raghunathpur, P.O.-
P.O. Dingle Pota, P.S
P.S.-
Sopnarpur, District South 24-
24 Parganas, PIN-700151.
700151.
77. Shri Sanjoy Maji,
son of Ranjit Kumar Maji,
residing at Vili.
Vili.-Aimachampsara,
Aimachampsara, Post Mohistikari, P.S.
P.S.-
Haripal, Dist
Dist-Hooghly,
Hooghly, PIN - 712223.
78. Shri Bikash Ghosh,
son of Chandi Charan Ghosh,
residing at Vill.
Vill.- Aimachampsara, Post Mohistikari, P.S.
P.S.-
Haripal, Dist.
Dist.-Hooghly,
Hooghly, PIN - 712223.
79. Shri Pradip Mondal,
son of Late Nalini Kanta Mondal,
residing at 46/8, Bose Pukur Road, Kasba, Kolkata
700042.
80. Sri Goutam Kumar Das,
son of Late Gour Chandra. Das,
residing at Vill +Post Matiary, Dist.-Nadia,
Dist. Nadia, PIN 741153.
81. Shri Bhabesh Pathak,
son of late Tarapada Pathak,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-.. Mohiary Roy Para, Post Andul Mouri, P.S.
P.S.-
Domjur, Howrah, PIN PIN-711302.
711302.
82. Md. Awur Maruf Khan,
son of Jainal Abidin Khan,
residing at Post - Mecheda, Vill.-Purbabahala,
Vill. Purbabahala, Dist.
Dist.-
Medinipur(East), P.S.
P.S.-KTPP,
KTPP, PIN-721137.
PIN
83. Sk. Rejabul Hoque,
son of Sk. Sarafat Hossain,
residing at 14, Nuruluddin Lane, Kolkata 700017.
84. Shri Ajijul Rahaman,
son of Lat
Late
e Fazlur Rahaman,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Chaturia,
Chaturia, Post Noapara, P.S.-
P.S. Duttapukur,
Dist.
Dist.-North 24- Parganas, PIN-700125.
PIN
9
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
85. Shri Somnath Ghosh,
son of Sanjoy Ghosh,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Sultan
Sultan Bag (Dakshin Para), Post Netra,
P.S.
P.S.- Diamond Harbour, PIN 743368.
86. Shri Gopi Nath Naskar,
son of Amiya Naskar,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Orancha,
Orancha, Begampur, Post-
Post P.S.
P.S.-Baruipur,
Dist.
Dist.- South.24-Parganas,
Parganas, PIN-743387.
PIN
87. Shri Subrata Chakraborty,
son of Late Sachindra Nath Chakraborty,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Kuchiberia,
Kuchiberia, Post Shibgonj, P.S.
P.S.-Shyampur,
Dist
Dist-Howrah, PIN-711314.
711314.
88. Shri Prasanta Pal,
son of Subodh Chandra Pal,
residing at Vill.+Post +P.S. - Bagdah, North 24
24-Parganas,
PIN
PIN-743232.
89. Shri Nidhiram Naskar,
son of Bishnu Pada Naskar,
residing at Vill.+Post
Vill.+Post-Kuld
Kuldia,
ia, Magrahat, South Parganas,
PIN
PIN-743609. 24-
90. Shri Khokan Halder,
son of Nirananda Halder,
residing at Vill. Taldanga, Post-
Post Basuldanga, P.S.
P.S.- Diamond
Harbour, South Parganas, PIN-743368.
PIN 24-
91. Shri Rajib Kumar Mandal,
son of Dhrubish Kr. Mandal,
Mandal
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Paschim
Paschim Gabberia, Post P.S.
P.S.-Jaynagar,
Gorerhat, District South 24-Parganas,
24 Parganas, PIN 743372.
92. Shi Tapas Bairagi,
son of Tarapada Bairagi,
residing at Vill
Vill-Shikarpur,
Shikarpur, Post-
Post Bhagirathi Shilpasram,
District Nadia, PIN 741248.
93. Shri Prabir Kumar Bhattacharjee,
C/o Late Niranjan Bhattacharjee,
residing at 3, Banlcray Street, Kolkata 700012.
10
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
94. Maidul Islam Mufti,
son of Rashid Mufti,
residing at Vill. + Post Raghudavbati, Dist.-
Dist. Howrah, PIN
PIN-
711310.
95. Shri Debraj Dey,
son of Dilip Dey,
residing at 61/A/25, Dr. Suresh Chandra Banerjee Road,
Kolkata 700010.
96. Shri Ajit Das,
son of K.N. Das,
residing at Vill. - Berh, Post P.S. Singur, Dist.
Dist.- Hooghly,
PIN
PIN-712409.
97. Shri Dilip Das,
son of Chittaranjan Das,
residing at QQ-353,
353, Mudiali Road, Garden Reach, Kolkata
Kolkata-
700024.
98. Shri Nandu Singh,
son of Jagdish Singh,
residing at 14, Dr. P.K. Banerjee Road, Mallick Fatak,
Howrah, PIN
PIN- 711101.
99. Shri Bekash Nansi,
son of Tarak Nansi,
residing at Viil.-Faridpur,
Faridpur, Post Balidaha, Dist.
Dist.-Hooghly,
P.S.
P.S.-Gurap, PIN-712303.
100. Shri Ujjal Chakraborty,
son of Sachindra Nath Chakraborty,
residing at Rajpur Aghar Sarani Road, Kadamtala, Kolkata
Kolkata-
700149.
101. Shri Tarun Saha,
son of Krishna Lal Saha,
resi
residing
ding at Shimurali District Chanduria, Nadia, P.S.
P.S.-
Chakdaha, PIN
PIN-741248.
102. Shri Sukesh Haldar,
son of Prankrishna Haldar,
residing an Vill. Bazar, Post Gumukberia, P.S.-
P.S. Kulpi, Dist.
Dist.-
South 24
24-Parganas, PIN - 743332.
11
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
103. Shri Goutam Mondal,
son of Probo.dh Mondal,
residing at Vill.
Vill.- Akna, Post Mallickpur, P.S. Kolkata
Kolkata-
700145. Baruipur,
104. Shri Parimal Kr. Biswas,
son of Prafulla Biswas,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Muragacha
Muragacha (Station, Para), Post
Muragacha, P.S. - Nakashipara, PIN-741154.
PIN
105. Shri Swap
Swapan
an Ghosh,
son of Panchkari Ghosh,
residing at Vill
Vill-Gopalpur,
Gopalpur, Post Sultanpur, Dist.
Dist.-Purba
Bardhaman, P.S.
P.S.-Kalna,
Kalna, PIN - 713146.
106. Shri Siraj Khan,
son of Sahadath Khan,
residing at Vill.
Vill.-Andharmanick,
Andharmanick, Post Basudevpur, P.S.
P.S.-
Uluberia (Rajpur), Dist.-Howrah,
Howrah, PIN-
PIN 711316
107. Shri Jayanta Karmakar,
son
on of Debprasad Kar
Karmakar,
makar,
residing at 173/1N, Bagbazar Road, Post Kanchrapara,
Dist.
Dist.- North 24-Parganas,
Parganas, PIN-743145.
PIN
108. Shri Digen Prarnanik,
son of Ganesh Pramanik,
residing at Ramnagar Char, Santipur, Dist.- Nadia, PIN-
741404.
109. Shri Asim Das,
son of Sunil Chandra Das,
residing at 299, Sashi Babu Road, Sahid Nagar, Kanchra
Para, Bijpur, PIN -
110. Shri Raju Chatterjee,
son of Late Ratan Chatterjee,
residing at 34, Pashupati Bhattacharjee
Bhattacharjee Road, Kalitala,
Post Pascjhim Putiary, Behaia, Kolkata - 700041.
111. Shri Dilip Purkait,
son of Sukumar Purkait,
residing at Vill.
Vill.- Ramjibonpur, Dist.-
Dist. South 24
24-Parganas,
PIN
PIN- 743336.
12
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
112. Shri Totan Bente
son of Judhistir Bente
residing at Vill
Vill-Egaragram,
Egaragram, P.O. Gotala Hut, Krishnapur,
P.S. Bishnupur, Dist.
Dist.-South
South 24-
24 Parganas-,, PIN 743503
113. Shri Kartick Karmakar,
son of Late Sadhu Charan Krrnakar,
residing at Tarapukur (West) Pally, Agarpara, 24
24-Parganas
(N), Kolkata -700109.
114. Shri Pratap Chandra Mondal,
son of Anil Kurnar Mondal,
residing at B/20, Rabindra Polly, P.O.-
P.O. Baghatin, P.S.
P.S.-
Patuli, PIN
PIN- 700086
115. Shri Avijit Mondal,
son of Kalipada Mondal,
residing at Dakshin Rajyadharpur (Ghosh Para),
Srirampur
Srirampur-III, Hooghly,
ly, PIN-712203
PIN
116. Shri Shree Kumar Das,
son of Ramji Das,
residing at 18, Robertsori, P.O. Garifa, Paulbagan,
P.S. PIN
PIN-843166 Naihati,
117. Shri Pradip Naskar,
son of Late Kenaram Naskar,
residing at Vill -South
South Kalyanpur,
Post. + P.S. Baruipur, District-
District 24,.Parganas,
Kolkata 700144, West Bengal.
......Applicants
(By Advocates: Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha with
Ms. Pratibha Sinha and Mr. Sneh Vardhan
Vardhan)
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Through the Chairman cum
Managing Director Government of India Enterprise,
A statutory body, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan,
Harish Chandra Mathur Lane,
Janpath, New Delhi - 110001.
2. The Director (HR)
13
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
Corporate Office,
BSNL, 3rd Floor, BSNL Bhawan,
Janpath, New Delhi - 110001.
3. Union of India
Servi
Service
ce through the Secretary,
Ministry of Communication and Information Technology,
Department of Telecommunication,
Sanchar Bhawan, 20, Ashoka Road, New Delhi-110001.
Delhi 110001.
4. The Chief General Manager
BSNL
Calcutta Telephones, 2nd Floor, Telephone Bhavan,
34, BBD Bag, Kolkata -700001.
700001.
...Respondent
...Respondents
(By Advocates: Mr. Piyush Sharma and
Mr. Anuj Kumar Sharma for BSNL
Mr. Ravi Kant Jain)
Jain
14
Item No.57/ Court
Court-IV
IV O.A. No.670/2023
ORDER
By Hon'ble Manish Garg, Member (J) In the present OA, the applicants are seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) To direct the respondents to absorb & regularize the services of the Applicants with all consequential benefits till the date of regularization;
(ii) To quashing the order dated 30.09.2019 passed by General Manager, W.S.&l. Cell, BSNL Company, Janpath, New Delhi
(iii) To direct the Respondents to pay all the arrears of monthly salary / wages and after dues w.e.f the date of abolition of contract labour till date of regularization;
(iv) To issues directions to the Respondents to pay regular pay scale for the jobs / posts on which the Applicants are working;
(v) Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."
2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in in the OA, are as under:
2.1 The applicants were engaged by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) as contractual workers through different agencies on various dates during the year 1997 1997-1998, and they are continuously working as such till date. Though 15 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 Respon Respondent dent No.1 has been changing the contractor from time to time time, the applicants have been working continuously with Respondent No.1 and has been making payments of wages is being made through the Contractor. The applicants were engaged to perform the duties and and responsibilities of lineman, helper, electrical and air conditioner to be assigned by Principal Employer BSNL/ Calcutta Telephones. Therefore, the applicants have also been allowed to register their names under ESI Scheme as also in the Employees Provident ent Fund Scheme Scheme, and money is being deducted on the aforesaid two heads.
2.2 Subsequently, the contract labourers, including some of the applicants, approached the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court seeking regularization ation of their services and the contractual employees ployees working under the Chief General Manager, CTD Calcutta, Ministry of Telecommunication. The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court passed an order on 21.06.2000 in Writ Petition No.5993 (W) of 2000, WP No.5994 of 2000 and WP No.5995 (W) of 2000, whereby it was directed Respondent No.2, i.e., Secretary, Central Contract Labour Advisory Board, Department of Labour, New Delhi to treat the said this writ application applications as the representations representation of the applicants 16 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 and consider and dispose of the same by reasoned order within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of the order.
2.3 Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that on 06.09.2000, the employee federations as well as representatives of respondents, respondents held discussion and the demand of the employees federation for counting of past service of casual mazdoors for the purpose of pension was discussed and the same was deduced in writing and signed by the representatives of both the sides. 2.4 After discussion on 06.09.2000, 06.09.2000, the Department of Telecommunication Services issued office order dated 29.09.2000 whereby regularization was granted to all the Casual Labours working in the department, including those who were conferred temporary status w.e.f. 01.10.2000. 2.5 The De Department partment of Telecommunications incorporated a company named named, i.e., BSNL under the Indian Companies Act 1956, having its registered and corporate office at New Delhi. The said company came into existence vide office memorandum/order dated 30.09.2000 by Mini Ministry of Communications (Department of Telecommunications). The Central Advisory Contract Labour Board, Ministry of Labour, 17 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 vide Resolution dated 20.11.2000 under reference no.U no.U-
23013/23/2000 - L.W. notified in the Gazette of India, a constituted a three three-member ember committee to study the working of contract labour system in the jobs of sweepers, cleaners, lineman, helper of maintenance of telephone lines, liftman and peon, A/C operators of the offices, plants and machineries, electrician and electric helper of electric department for operation and maintenance of the offices and plant in the Telephone Bhavan, Calcutta Telephones and to make recommendations as to whether engagement of contract labour in the above activities in Calcutta Telephones be prohibited, ke keeping eping in view the provisions of Section -10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. 2.6 Learned counsel for the applicants submits that a meeting of the said committee was held on 12.12.2000 at Telephone Bhavan and deliberations were signed igned by the representatives of the workers and the management in the presence of the committee members members. The committee submitted mitted its report on 25.05.2001. Two Two members of the committee were in favour of abolition of contract labour labour, whereas one member was not n in favour of it.
18Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 2.7 Thereafter, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CPAN No.770 of 2001 arising out of Writ Petition No.5993 of 2000 seeking to initiate contempt proceedings, proceedings was pleased to pass an order dated 11.10.2001 whereby the Respondents were d directed to show cause why a rule of contempt should not be issued against them, them and they were directed to act upon the recommendation of the said committee. 2.8 Learned counsel for the applicants submits that a meeting of all the members of the Central Advisory Advisory Contract Labour Board was held on 30-31.10.2001 30 31.10.2001 at New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Sh. TS Sankaran, Sankaran and a letter dated 07.11.2001 of the under Secretary, Central Advisory Contract ontract Labour Board, was issued along with a copy of the said meeting. The e Ministry of Labour, Government of India thereafter issued a circular dated 03.01.2002 whereby it was decided not to prohibit employment of contract labour in the jobs/works of sweeping and clearing of buildings, specialized cleaning of utility devices li like ke computers, fax etc and the job of liftman for operating automatic lifts in the offices and plants in the Telephone Bhavan, Calcutta Telephones. 2.9 The Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India issued Notification dated 06th February, 2002 exercising power 19 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 under Section 10 (1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 1970, whereby engagement of contract labour was prohibited in Calcutta Telephones (the same was subsequently known as BSNL).
BSNL) 2.10 The Deputy General Manager (Legal), Calcutta Telephones wrote a letter dated 03.09.2003 to Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Kolkata in response to the compliant by Bharatiya Ma door Mazdoor Sangh over alleged regularization of contract labourers of Calcutta Telephones. Vide letter dated 22.04.2004, it was decided that monthly wages of Contract Labour would be decided on the basis of daily rate for 26 days. Thereafter, a letter dated 08.08.2005 in the shape of a representation highlighting the grievances of regular contract workers working for BSNL Cal Calcutta Telephone for at least 10 10-15 15 years, was submitted to the Chief General Manager BSNL, Calcutta Telephones, Telephone Bhavan. The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in Writ Petition No.1518 o off 2002 with regard to the notification dated 06.02.2002 passed an order order on 05.01.2007 whereby the Writ Petition was dismissed for default. 2.11 Learned counsel for the applicants submits that letter dated 10.12.2007 in the shape of a representation was 20 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 written by Calcutta Telephone Contractors Mazdoor Sangh to the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Ministry of Labour, Government of India wherein where grievance of the contract workers of the Kolkata Telephones with respect to regularization of contractor's workers working in Kolkata Telephones was made made, requesting for immediate regularization and absorption of contractor's labourers by abolition of the contract labour system in the said institution. 2.12 The Dy. Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Kolkata wrote a letter dated 09.08.2010 to the Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India, New Delhi on the subject of industrial dispute between the management of Calcutta Telephones and Calcutta Telephones Contractor's Mazdoor Sangh Sangh, over ver abolition/regularization abolition/regularization of contractor's workers in Calcutta Tel Telephones, ephones, and informed that the matter could not be reconciled reconciled, and submitted the conciliation report for further necessary action. 2.13 The Under Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Government of India issued an order dated 23.05.2011 stating that the Central Government was of the opinion that an Industrial Dispute exist existed between the employers in relation to the Management of Calcutta Telephones and their workmen workmen, and 21 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 consider considered it desirable to refer the disputes for said adjudication.
2.14 The BSNL for the purpose of comprehensive maintenance of Air Cooled A/C package units and Monitoring & General Maintenance of Different Electromechanical Services for telephone kendras CTD, Kolkata floated a tender for supply of contract labour from different agencies and date and time of tender opening was fixed at 12.03.2013.
2.15 Learned counsel for the applicants states that from various correspondence made by Executive Engineer (Electrical) with agencies, it would appear that duties and responsibilities and place of posting posting and nature of work are to be fully determined and fixed by the Principal Employer Employer, i.e., BSNL.
2.16 The Chief General Manager, CTD by his letter dated 16.05.2019 16.05.2019, intimated the Director Finance, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited for authorization of fund fund on priority basis for maintenance of service services at Kolkata.
2.17 On 30.09.2019 an order was passed by General Manager, W.S.&l. Cell, BSNL, Janpath, New Delhi regarding 22 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 engagement of contract workers and expenditure expenditure/austerity measures thereof by curtailing curtailing the working hours and working days from 26 days to 15 days, days and some other conditions, which reads as under:-
under:
"WS&I Cell, BSNL CO, Janpath, New Delhi-110001.
Delhi Telephone No: 011 011-23329496 23329496 No.2 No.2-2(Misc/Circular)/2019 2(Misc/Circular)/2019-WS&I Dtd: 30.09.2019 ORDER Sub. Office order regarding engagement of contract workers and expenditure / austerity measures thereof Ref: This office letter even dtd. 30.08.2019 In the view of worsening financial position of BSNL, it has been decided by the competent authority to impleme implement nt the following austerity measures in respect of engaging contract workers / incurring expenditures thereof for the outsourcing works viz: New Work execution, maintenance of external plant / MDF/FRS works, marketing activity, Engine/ Alternator operation activity, Air conditioning operation activity, lift operation activity, OFC fault restoration, BTS maintenance, cleaning / sweeping works, round the clock security of BSNL installations, data entry operators, delivery of bills etc;23
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023
1. The manpower utilized utilized under the outsourcing contract must be less than 55 years agc
2. The number of days, for which particular manpower is being utilized in a outsourcing work should not exceed more than 15 days in a month.
3. The cleaning / sweeping works should not be mo more than 3 hours per working days and in accordance with GeM portal rates.
4. Security personnel should be removed immediately and should be replaced by BSNL staff by relocation.
5. No work no pay rule must be implemented strictly.
Item (1) to (5) shall be implemented in Kolkata Circle. Remaining heads of circle shall implement items (1), (3), (4) & 5) and shall submit a roadmap to reduce the expenditure on outsourcing by 50%.
Circles, which give a roadmap for present expenditure reduction to 50% shall be be considered for the release of one month funds or so, based on availability. This is issued with the approval of CMD BSNL. This is in supersession to all previous letter/s on the matter.
SD/-
24Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 (Keshav Rao) GM (WS&I) To: All Head of Circles (Territorial/ Non Territorial), BSNL"
2.18 The respondents hav havee not paid wages from 1st April, 2019 till date date, for which representation was submitted to the competent authority through the President of registered association named as Calcutta Telephone C Contractor's Mazdoor Sangh.
2.19 Since the said Association is a registered association, a resolution tion was passed on 19.10.19, wherein was unanimously decided to submit a representation before the competent authority for release of arrears of salaries and allowances.
llowances.
2.20 The applicants sent a letter dated 13.11.2019 demanding revocation of the order reducing working days/hours particularly when reduction of working days and hours would directly affect not only the right to livelihood but would also prejudicially ially affect the future of applicants. It is contended that the applicants are the employees of the Principal Employer, i.e. BSNL and the BSNL pays the remuneration to applicants as Contract Labour through the 25 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 agencies. As a matter of fact, the BSNL used to take up different programmes for public interest and interest of the consumers consumers, and in order to achieve proper fulfillment of the scheme schemes, they are being utilized through different registered agencies agencies, and such registered agencies are not the employer of applicants but BSNL is the employer of applicants applicants, and the BSNL being Principal Employer pays the remuneration through the agencies to Contractual Workers, Workers which would be evident from the pay slips.
2.21 The Applicant Nos.1 to 126 filed the Original Application being OA No.350/01731 of 2019, titled as Calcutta Telephone Contractor's Mazdoor Sangh Vs Union of India & Ors. before the Calcutta Bench of this Tribunal. Pursuant to the leave granted by the Kolkata Bench, the Applicant als alsoo filed a Misc Application being MA No.350/00243 of 2020 praying to pass specific appropriate direction to pay the applicants all arrears of monthly remuneration from 1st April, 2019 till date, date and to go on paying such remuneration so long as the applicant applicants are engaged and utilized as Contract Labours.
Labours 2.22 The OA No.350/01731 of 2019 along with MA No.350/00243 of 2020 came up for hearing before the 26 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 Calcutta Bench on 08.07.2020, 08.07.2020 whereupon the Tribunal has been pleased to dispose of the OA in the light of tthe order dated 25.11.2019 passed by Hon'ble Court in WP No.20855 (W) of 2019. The Division Bench of Hon'ble High Court in an identical matter bearing MAT No.489 of 2020 vide order dated 25.08.2020 disposed of an appeal directing that there will be no requi requirement rement on behalf of BSNL authorities to make any payment directly to the writ applicants, applicants and that the contractors shall submit the unpaid bills, bills and upon scrutiny scrutiny, BSNL shall release the admissible dues to the contractors contractors, who in turn shall release the dues dues of the labourers. In another identical matter bearing MAT No.228 of 2021 (Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors. Vs BSNL Nationlist Theka ka Workers Congress & Ors.) the respondents challenged the order dated 11.02.2021 passed by the Learned Single Judge in WPA No.9371 of 2020 (BSNL Nationlist Th Theka Workers Congress & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors.) whereupon the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 26.02.2021 stay stayed the operation of the order dated 11.02.2021 during the pendency of the appeal. It iis further stated that since the Vendors /Agencies of BSNL failed to raise the bill after due payment of PF and ESI and GST, no 27 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 payment c could be made on account of the service services rendered by the Contract Labours, and it is the absolute failure on the part of the Vendors / Agencies who have appointed / engaged the Contract Labours.
2.23 The respondents filed WPCT No.60 of 2021 before the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta, against the order dated 08.07.2020 passed by Kolkata Bench of this Tribunal in OA No.350/017 No.350/01731 of 2019, and MA No.350/00243 of 2020. The Respondents had filed WPCT No.60 of 2021 before the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta and the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta issued order dated 06.09.2021 in WPCT No.60 of 2021. The applicants being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 06.09.2021 in WPCT No.60 of 2021 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta filed a Special Leave Petition (C) No.308 of 2022 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following order:
"L "Learned earned counsel for the applicants points out that the amount in terms of the order of the High Court has not been paid. He seeks permission to withdraw the special leave petition with liberty to move the High Court. The special leave petition stands dismissed dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to move appropriate proceedings before the High Court as advised." 28
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 2.24 Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants in accordance with the order dated 28.01.2022 passed in Special Leave Petition (C) No.308 of 2022 approached the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta by filing an Review Application No.48 of 2022 seeking review of the Order dated 06.09.2021 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in WPCT No.60 of 2021. 2.25 The Review Petition was disposed by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta vide order dated 05.08.2022. The Hon'ble High Court vide this order observed as follows:
"However, since we are not deciding such issue in this proceeding, in the event any proceeding is initiated by the p present resent applicant based on such circulars it would be open to BSNL to rely on orders passed in such proceedings.
Under such circumstances, we do not find any reason to review our order. If any legal right is available to the applicants to claim relief under under any other statute this order shall not preclude the applicant to seek such relief as they may be advised."
2.26 The applicants filed Writ Petition No.1026 of 2022 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The Hon'ble Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order 29 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 dated 12.12.2022 permitted the applicants to withdraw the Writ Petition and to file it before appropriate forum. Hence the OA.
2.27 Learned counsel for the applicants draws our attention to the following contentions:-
contentions:
(i) The ap applicants plicants are entitled for regularization as contract labour system has been prohibited vide notification dated 06.02.2002 by the Ministry of Labour exercising power under Section 10 of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 in Calcutta Telephones Telephones of BSNL;
(ii) The BSNL is the employer of the applicants after abolition of contract Labour w.e.f. 06.0.2002;
(iii) The applicants are casual labourers and are covered by regularization scheme of BSNL also;
(iv) Prohibited job is of perennial and permanent permanent nature;
(v) The applicants are working for more than 25 years without break on the jobs (core activities) as contractual workers;
(vi)Nature of duties;
(vii) The agreement dated 29.09.2000 29.09.200 is binding on the parties as per section 18 of the Industrial Dispute Act; 30
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023
(viii) To engage intermediary contractor for for prohibited contract works by BSNL is of no consequence consequence, and such agreements between BSNL and intermediary contractor is violative of Setion Setion-23 23 of the Contract Act;
(ix) The principle of llaches aches is not not applicable to the present case;
(x) The workers have right of selection election in matter of choice of forum;
(xi) The case of the applicant is covered by following case laws:-
(a)CWP NO.1395 of 2017 & CWP No. 1396 & 1458 of 2017 related to BSNL of the Hon'ble High Court Himachal Pradesh;
(b)SAIL vs. National Union Water Front Workers reported in (2001)7 SCC 1 (Page No.602-670, No.602 Vol-IV, OA);
(c) SAIL Vs Jaggu & Ors., (2019) 7 SCC 658, (Page No. 671-690, 690, Vol Vol-IV,OA)
(d) Masan Ali & Ors Vs UoI, CMWP No.4271 of 2007 (Hon'ble Allahabad High Court)
(e) Union of India Vs Sonu Kumari & Ors, CWP No.1395of 2017 (Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court at Shimla)
(f) Telecom District Manager & Ors. vs. Keshab Deb, (2008) 8 SCC 402 31 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023
(g) Union of India and others Vs. Tarsem Singh (2008) 8 SCC 648
(h) Hussainbhai Vs Alath Factory Thozhilali Union (1978) AIR SC 1410
(i) Gujarat Electricity Board Vs Hind Mazdoor Sabha (1995) AIR SC 1893.
(j) Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. Vs Brajrajnagar Coal Mines Workers' Union, [2024] 3 S.C.R. 627
(k) Dr. Dilip Kumar Vs ICAR, WP (C) No.4426 of 2017 (Hon'ble Delhi High Court)
(l) Jaggo Vs Union of India, SLP (C) No.5580 of 2024.
3. Per contra contra,, respondents filed their counter reply vehemently opposing the claim of the applicants. 3.1 It is submitted that the present application is not maintainable in view of the judgment passed by coordinate Bench ench of this Tribunal in OA No. 980 of 2014, Mamata versus Government of NCT, NCT wherein this Tribunal has held that where the department has directly engaged d somebody on contract basis and not through contractor, the grievance of such contract employees would be amenable to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. In all other cases, the grievance 32 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 of the contract employee employees is amenable and to be adjudicated before the Labour C Court ourt or Industrial Tribunal.
3.2 It is further submitted that in the present case, the applicants have failed to establish the fact that they have been engaged directly by the Respondent/BSNL. In this view of the matter, it is submitted that the present or original application is liable to be dismissed as this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the grievance of the applicant. 3.3 The respondents submit that the submission of the applicants that in view of the notification issued by the Appropriate Gove Government, rnment, under Section 10 (1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Evolution) Act 1970, whereby the contract labour system has been prohibited and, therefore therefore, the applicants would become me the employees of the Respondent/BSNL, is misconceived misconceived and untenable inasmuch much as the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Management of Ashok Hotel (ITDC) v. Their Workmen in LPA No 199 of 2013 judgment dated 12.11.2024 categorically held that the mere issuance of a notification would not entitle any contract contract employee to be treated as a deemed employee of the organization. Further, in terms of the judgment of the Constitutional al B Bench in 33 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 Steel Authority of India v. National Union Waterfront Workers and others (2001) 7 SCC 1, it is submitted that the applicants are not entitled for any regularization. Reference in this regard is being made to Para 125 of the said judgement. Reference eference is also being made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as relied upon by the Hon'ble High Court in its judgment dated 12.11.2024 in LPA 199 of 2013 Management of Ashok Hotel (ITDC) v. Their Workmen Workmen.
3.4 The respondents further submit that the the applicants were never engaged by the Respondent/BSNL directly. Therefore, it iis s submitted that the OA is devoid of any merit and is accordingly liable to be rejected. 3.5 On n merit also, admittedly and un-disputedly un disputedly the applicants were the employees of different contractors of BSNL. The employees of the contractors of Respondent/BSN Respondent/BSNL L have no employer - employee relationship with BSNL BSNL, and there is no scheme available for regularization of contractual laborers in BSNL. The last order of regularization egularization of casual asual labour was issued by Telecom Department on 29.09.2000, 29.09.2000 i.e., just one day before formation of BSNL and thereafter they were transferred in 34 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 BSNL en enmasse.. The said regularization order No 269 269-94/98- STN-II II dated 29.09.2000 issued by Department of Telecom Service, Govt of India. The scheme was a very specific one. The following cate categories gories of Casual Labours were eligible for regularization: -
"(1) All casual labourers who have been granted temporary status up to the issuance of Order No 269 269- 4/93
4/93-STN-11 11 dated 12.2.99 circulated vide letter no 269 269-13/99-STN-11 11 dated 12.2.99 and further vide letter me 269 269-13/99-STN STN-II II dated 9.6.2000.
(2) All Full time Casual Labourers as indicated in Annexure.
(3) All part time casual labourers who were working for four or more hours per day and converted in to full time casual labourers vide letter no 269-13/99 26 13/99-STN-II dated 16.09.99.
(4) All part time casual Labourers who were working for less than four hours per day and were converted into full time casual labourers vide letter no 269 269-13/99- STM STM-11 11 dated 25.8.2000.
(5) All Ayas and supervisors converted in in to full time casual labourers vide letter no 269-10/97-STN 269 STN-II dated 29.9.2000."
3.6 It is averred that the contractual employees of different contractors did not fall into any of the categories as mentioned above. So, the claim of the applicants for 35 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 regularization citing different judgments judgment is not tenable. The respondents have made following averments upon perusal of the case law cited on behalf of the applicants:-
applicants:
"a. The Referred Case No CWP No 1395 of 2017, 1396 and 1458 of 2017 at Hon'ble High Court Court of Himachal Pradesh refers to regularization of Casual Labours and dispute related to eligibility of some casual labours for regularization in DoT/DTS/BSNL under different scheme adopted by Gol from time to time.
b. The Referred Case No WP 4271 of 2007 and 8643 of 2007 and 8307 of 2007 again refers to dispute related to regularization of Casual labours in terms of Gol order No 269 269-94/98-STN-II II dated 29.09.2000 issued by Department of Telecom Service, Govt of India. c. The referred case in the Hon'ble Apex Apex Court vide SLP No 7898 of 2020 refers to regularization of some staff in the income tax department where some of the similarly placed persons were regularized and some left out."
In view of above, it is stated that the applicants are trying to misguide this Tribunal by referring to different judgments which are not applicable to them and even on merits, the applicants have no case, and the OA deserves to be dismissed.
36
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023
4. We heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the pleadings on record. The written synopses filed by the parties have also been taken on record and perused.
5. ANALYSIS 5.1 The present OA has been preferred by the applicants 116 in number number, through their Association on the premises that liberty was granted by the Hon'ble Apex Cour Court vide orders s dated 12.12.2022. The said liberty was in addition to liberty granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in its order dated 28.1.2022 which stood already exhausted by the applicant applicants when the they approached Hon'ble Calcutta High Court by filing a Review Petition No.48/2022 of the order dated 06.09.2021.
5.2 There is nothing on record to establish which are the recent circular(s) which are subject matter of challenge other than circular dated 30.09.2019 which led to filing of the present OA giving fresh cause caus of action.
5.3 Our attention is invited to the Award dated 19.09.2023 passed by the Learned GCIT, Calcutta I REF No.2/2011, which is re re-produced produced as under :-
:37
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 "Both sides are present through their respective Counsels.
Ld. Counsel for the union file a petition supported by an affidavit praying that it may be permitted to withdrawn the present reference case.
Such petition is taken up for hearing. Ld. Counsel appearing for the management submits that the I.D. Act Rule framed there is no where speaks the dispute referred by the Govt. for adjudication U/s 10 of the I.D. Act can be withdrawn either by the Govt. referring the same or by the Union which has originally espoused the dispute before Labour Commissioner who has failed to settle the dispute.
He submits bmits at the most the Tribunal can pass "No Dispute Award".
On the other hand Ld. Counsel appearing for the Union submit the same and similar dispute between the Union and Calcutta Telephone is pending before C.G.I.T. New Delhi being No. O.A O.A-
670 of 2023. The Union wants to pursue with the matter pending before C.G.I.T. New Delhi. Thus, it want to withdrawn the present reference referred by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour vide order No. L- 40011/22/2010-IR(DU) IR(DU) dated 23.05.2011, and where the dispute "Whether the demand of the Calcutta Telephone Contractor's Mazdoor Sangh of asking regularisation/temporary status to such workers who have engaged by the Contractor's w.e.f. 1992 to 2000, till date of the formation of BSNL is justified? What benefits the contract workers are entitled to?" has been referred for adjudication. The policy or object of the I.D. Act is to secure and preserve good relation between the employers and their workmen and to maintain industrial peace. It is the duty of the Union to se secure and preserve amity and good relation between the employer and employees. If the Union fails to 38 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 settle the dispute with the management, then it has to seek assistance of the Labour Commissioner, the conciliation officer for settlement. If settlement as fails then last resort is that appropriate Govt. will Constitute Labour Court or Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute U/s 10 of the I.D. Act and for that appropriate Govt. need to be satisfied that indeed there exists or apprehend that industrial dispute dispute between the workmen and the employer. Once reference is made to an Industrial Tribunal U/s 10 of the I.D. Act then proceeding before the Tribunal is deemed to have commenced and the same is deemed to have concluded on the when award passed by Tribunal and become enforced U/s 17A of the Act. Thus, the Act does not contain any provision specifically authorising the Industrial Tribunal to record withdrawal of Reference by the Union pass an award to that effect. But, the fact remain the present reference hhe come to existence when the dispute is question was raised / empore by the concerned Union. Since the Union which has cupoured the dispute, but referred by the Govt. for adjudicate is not wiling, to proexed with the same, the Union should be allowed not to o purtare with the depute in view it has already initiated another proceeding on the same izares and which is pending before C.G.I.T. New Delhi.
Further, this Tribunal is of view, if no dispute award is porced as prayed by Ld. Counsel for the Employer, such such order/award may have adverse effect in the merit of O.A. O.A.-670 of 2023 pending before. CGIT New Delhi, where similar issue is under reference / consideration as General Principle of res res- judicator may apply.
In view of the above the Union which has espoused ed the present dispute is permitted to withdrawal its dispute against the 39 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 Management of Calcutta Telephone and in respect of issue under reference, Accordingly, the present reference case No. 02/2011 is disposed of. An award of withdrawal of the issue/dispute issue/dispute under reference is passed."
5.4 We have already highlighted that 116 applicants initially filed the present OA. An additional affidavit dated 13.2.2025 has been filed with a chart showing status/names of the 58 applicants in the list prepared by BSNL of 336 labourers as on 2009 in AC plants plants /electrical ie last payment, date of joining, past contractor and present contractor. We also find that supplementary additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant(s) that vide letter dated 25.9.2019 (not a subject matter of challenge challenge) issued by respondents regarding discontinuation of work as Job Contract Labour (JCL) beyond age of 60 years. It has been contended on behalf of the respondents that total 69 applicants are not presently working even with contractors contractors, i.e., applicants no.
no.3,4,6,8,10,14,17 3,4,6,8,10,14,17-24,27,30-40,42 40,42-47,49- 50,53,64,67 50,53,64,67-69,74,76-78,80 78,80-81,85-6, 88-93, 93, 97 97-103, 107- 111,114 111,114-117.
117. The last payment made to applicant at serial No.66 is disputed.
40
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 5.5 The applicant applicants have not disputed that prayer 8(ii) of the present OA is identical to that of 8b of the applicants filed by the same applicants in OA 1731 of 2019 filed before the Kolkata Bench of this Tribunal 5.6 What the parties are likely to gain by attempting to bring the case before a forum that will be advantageous to them, or the act of seeking the most advantageous venue in which to try a case is entirely for the party concerned to decide decide. In all fairness, as far as the applicable (substantive and procedural)Laws a are re concerned, concerned in pursuing the Reference under ID Act or summary summary procedure under AT Act acting on aid and advice of a counsel on which w we refrain to comment comment, is best left to wisdom of the aggrieved party. We may only say that there cannot be any short cut method to arrive at a conclusion while adjudicating the prayer of absorption or regularization, when a reference under Section 10 of ID Act was pending since 2011. 5.7 We are conscious of the fact, in service service jurisprudence, the Regulations provide for rule ru of "special jurisdiction" as distinct from "exclusive exclusive jurisdiction"
jurisdiction that applicant applicants have the right to rely upon upon. We e proceeded to decide the present case on the touchstone of relief(s) sought. 41
Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 5.8 At this stage we are reminded of latin phrase phrase, viz., "Invito Invito benificium non datur."
datur. The law confers upon a man no rights or benefits which he does not desire. Whoever waives, abandons or disclaims a right will loose it. In order to prevent a litigant from abusing the process of the Court by instituting suits again and again on the same cause of action without any good reason the Code insists that he should obtain the permission of the Court to file a fresh suit after establishing either of the two grounds mentioned in sub sub-rule rule (3) of rule rule 1 of Order XXIII. The principle underlying the above rule is rounded on public policy". SARGUJA TRANSPORT SERVICEs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL .(1987 SCR (1)
200).
5.9 Another point to ponder is that as to wheth whether , the applicants who were not working under any contractor(s) at the time ime of filing of the present OA, can be granted the reliefs prayed for.
5.10 The Learned counsel for the applicant has tried to justify the claim of the applicants by placing voluminous record records, various documents, nts, i.e., gate passes, pay slips, 42 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 vouchers for arriving at the conclusion that for all practical purposes they were working under direct control and supervision of respondents in prohibited category for many years, even though payments were made through contractors.
ontractors.
5.11 In Civil Appeal No. of 2022 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 3466 OF 2022) Chief Executive Officer,Zila Parishad, Thane & Ors. Versus Santosh Tukaram Tiware & Ors. decided on 24.11.2022 24.11.2022, it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court as under :-
:
"Merely because respondent No. 1 continued in service for longer period on contractual basis the High Court ought not to have passed the order of regularization more particularly, when a policy decision was taken to avail the services of the driver by the agency/contractor and that the appointment of respondent No. 1 and other similarly situated drivers was not made after any selection procedure. The appointment of respondent No. 1 was purely on stopgap and on contractual basis. Under the circumstances, the High Court has committed a very serious error in ordering regularization as well as quashing and setting aside order dated 15.07.2021 by which on the contract being awarded to M/s Rakshak Security Services and Systems Pvt. Ltd., the services of respondent No. 1 was put to an end.
6.3 Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pandurang Sitaram Jadhav (supra) is concerned, on facts the said decision shall not be applicable to the case on hand and/or of any assistance to respondent No. 1. It was a case where 43 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 this Court found an unfair labour practice. It was found that employees similarly situated working in the same establishment were granted regularization. Similarly, the decision of this Court in the case of Sheo Narain Nagar (supra) also shall shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. It was a case where the authorities conferred temporary status and it was found that there was requirement of work and availability of posts too, and it was found that it was not a case of back back-door entry,ry, the services of the concerned employees were directed to be regularized w.e.f., 02.10.2002 from the date on which the authorities conferred the temporary status. Therefore, on facts the said decision shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand."
5.12 A similar contention was negatived by the Constitution Bench in Umadevi 10 (2006) 8 SCC 381 15 (3) [(2006) 4 SCC 1 : 2006 SCC (L&S) 753] : (SCC p. 39, para 46) by observing that "The fact that in certain cases the court had directed regularisation of the employees involved in those cases cannot be made use of to found a claim based on legitimate expectation."
5.13 We are also reminded of the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S.N.L., Jammu vs Teja Singh decided on 16 J January, anuary, 2009:-
2009:
"In view of the said decision of the Constitution Bench, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the 1989 regularisation scheme having not been enforced in the case of the respondent, it did not come within the purview of the exception car carved ved out by the Court in paragraph 53, of Umadevi as quoted above. The view of the Constitution 44 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 Bench in Umadevi (supra) has been reiterated by a three three- Judge Bench of this Court in Official Liquidator vs. Dayanand and Ors. [2008 (10) SCC 1], stating that th the High Courts shall give effect thereto, opining: "90. We are distressed to note that despite several pronouncements on the subject, there is substantial increase in the number of cases involving violation of the basics of judicial discipline. The learned Single Judges and Benches of the High Courts refuse to follow and accept the verdict and law laid down by coordinate and even larger Benches by citing minor difference in the facts as the ground for doing so. Therefore, it has become necessary to reiterat reiteratee that disrespect to the constitutional ethos and breach of discipline have grave impact on the credibility of judicial institution and encourages chance litigation. It must be remembered that predictability and certainty is an important hallmark of judicial judicial jurisprudence developed in this country in the last six decades and increase in the frequency of conflicting judgments of the superior judiciary will do incalculable harm to the system inasmuch as the courts at the grass roots will not be able to decide as to which of the judgments lay down the correct law and which one should be followed.
91. We may add that in our constitutional set set-up every citizen is under a duty to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions. Those who have been entrusted with the task of administering the system and operating various constituents of the State an who take oath to act in accordance with the Constitution and uphold the same, have to set an example by exhibiting total commitment to the constitutional ideals. This principle is required to be observed with greater rigour by the members of judicial fraternity who have been bestowed with the power to adjudicate upon important constitutional and legal issues and protect and preserve rights of the individua individuals ls and society as a whole. Discipline is sine qua non for effective and efficient functioning of the judicial system. If the courts command others to act in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and rule of law, it is not possible to countenance countenance violation of the constitutional principle by those who are required to lay down the law.
92. In the light of what has been stated above, we deem it proper to clarify that the comments and observations made by the two two-Judge Judge Bench in U.P. SEB v. Pooran Chan Chandra Pandey (2007 11 SCC 92) should be read as obiter and the 45 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 same should neither be treated as binding by the High Courts, tribunals and other judicial foras nor they should be relied upon or made basis for bypassing the principles laid down by the Constit Constitution ution Bench."
For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that the view of the learned Tribunal as also the High Court cannot be sustained. The impugned judgment is, therefore, set aside and the appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs." 5.14 To make out a case for regularization, regularization, the applicant's ought to make out two requisite pre -conditions :--
(i) Initial appointment must be done by the competent authority (in present case the fact that the appointments were made through past/ present contractors contractors is not in dispute).
(ii) There must be a sanctioned post on which the daily rated employee/contractual employees employee must be working.
The above conditions are missing in present case.
5.15 The contractual employees
employee employed through
contractor cannot claim parity with the employees directly recruited by the Competent Authority under a contract (which may be against sanctioned posts).
post ). The applicant
applicants
throughout had been employed
employed through different
contractors
contractors. From very first date of their employment they were conscious of the terms of the contractual employment. Challenge hallenge to the terms of such employment has not been made. Even the applicant applicants herein have failed to implead the 46 Item No.57/ Court Court-IV IV O.A. No.670/2023 contractor contractors by whom they had been employed. The applicant applicants cannot equate their case to that of those who were directly working under contract with respondents who were seeking regularisation. The decision refered by the learned counsel ie Jaggo Vs Union of India, SLP (C) No.5580 of 2024 , thus, doe doess not come to rescue of the applicants in factual martix of the present case.
6. CONCLUSION:
CONCLUSION:-
In view of above detailed analysis, we are of the opinion that Tribunal cannot pass orders order of absorption and regularization of the applicants.
applicant The reliefs qua th the challenge to Order dated 30.9.2019 having been already adjudicated in earlier proceedings before the Tribunal, Hon'ble High Court, as well as Hon'ble Apex Court and no further order orders are called for.
The OA is devoid of merits, hence, dismissed. Pending applications, if any any, are also disposed of. No costs.
(Dr.
Dr. Anand S Khati
Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/sm
sm/