Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
G Ravikumar vs Telecommunication on 26 July, 2024
1 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
OA/310/00068/2023
Dated this 26th day of July, Two Thousand Twenty Four
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR M. SWAMINATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER
1.G. Ravikumar,
S/o M. Ganesan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer, DTAX/FTTH,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
D Tax Building,
Bharathidasan Salai, Trichy.
2.R.N. Ramanujam,
S/o R. Neelamegam,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer, DTAX/FTTH,
3rd Floor, D Tax Building,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
Bharathidasan Salai, Trichy.
3.R. Sankara Subramaniyam,
S/o Ramasamy,
Junior Telecom Officer (T),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
O/o Divisional Engineer Rural & Pudukottai,
West Main Street,
Pudukkottai, Trichy SSA.
4.Ms B. Sangeetha
D/o A. Balraj,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer, DTAX/FTTH,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
D Tax Building, BSNL,
Bharathidasan Salai, Trichy.
2 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
5.T. Bablu,
S/o K. Thambusamy,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CFA, BSNL,
GM Office Building,
Cantonment, Trichy.
6.Vijaya Kumar, J.
S/o Jesudoss,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CFA, BSNL,
GM Office Building,
Cantonment, Trichy.
7.Ms. D. Vasantha Rani,
D/o P. Doss Chellaiah,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CFA, BSNL,
GM Office Building,
Cantonment, Trichy.
8.Ms. K. Vasuge,
D/o M. Krishnan,
Junior Telecom Officer (CAF),
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CFA, BSNL,
GM Office Building,
Cantonment, Trichy.
9.B. Ramachandran,
S/o R. Balasubramaniam,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer Rural & Pudukottai,
West Main Street,
BSNL, Pudukottai.
10.Ms. A. Mahaeswari,
D/o A. Anbalagan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer Rural & Pudukottai,
West Main Street, BSNL, Pudukottai., Trichy SSA.
3 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
11.Ms. B. Yasmin,
D/o A. Basheer,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer Rural & Pudukottai,
West Main Street, BSNL,
Pudukottai., Trichy SSA.
12.T. Seshadri,
S/o Thirumalaisamy,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Telephone Exchange, BSNL,
Kaveri Nagar 2nd Cross,
Kulithalai, Karur Dt.
13.E. Karikalan,
S/o Elangovan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer CFA,
BSNL, Matharasa Road,
Perambalur, Trichy SSA.
14.G. Sridhar,
S/o V. Gopalan,
Junior Engineer,
O/o Bazaar Telephone Exchange,
Kamarajar Salai, Karur.
15.V. Thamarai Kannan,
S/o Vaithilingam,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer Urban
Mainguard Gate, Trichy.
16.Ms. N. Shantha,
D/o R. Nallathambi,
Sub Divisional Engineer,
O/o Assistant General Manager S&M,
GM Office Building, BSNL,
Trichy.
4 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
17.S. Mathiyalagan,
S/o D. Subramaniam,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o SDE Enterprises Business,
GM Office Building, BSNL,
Cantonment, Trichy.
18.Ms. R. Srimathi,
D/o L. Ramadoss,
Junior Telecom Officer (Groups),
O/o Divisional Engineer, BSNL,
Bazaar Telephone Exchange,
Kamarajar Road, Karur.
19.Jayabaskal Raj,
S/o P. Sundarraj,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CM, BSNL,
GM Office Building,
Cantonment, Trichy.
20.K. Prasanna Raghavan,
S/o P. KalyanaRaman,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Divisional Engineer (BSS/RF),
DTax Building, IIIrd Floor,
BSNL, Trichy.
21.K. Ramesh,
S/o Kandasamy, N.,
Junior Telecom officer,
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CM, BSNL,
GM Office Building,
Cantonment, Trichy.
22.Ms. N. Bhama,
D/o R. Natarajan,
Junior Telecom officer,
O/o Assistant General Manager,
NWP-CM, BSNL,
GM Office Building, Cantonment, Trichy.
5 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
23.Ms. V.T. Arulselvi,
D/o V. Tamilarasan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o General Manager BSNL,
BSNL Complex,
Medical College Road,
Thanjavur.
24.R. Ganesan,
S/o M. Rajalingam,
Junior Telecom Officer,
BSNL Telephone Exchange,
Taluk Office, Thanjavur.
25.S.P.A. Gopalan,
S/o Pirai Arivazhagan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
BSNL Telephone Exchange,
Big Mill Street, Tiruvarur.
26.A. Kalia Perumal,
S/o Ayyavoo,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o AGM, Main Telephone Exchange,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
Maries Corner, Thanjavur.
27.P. Kannan,
S/o E.V. Parameswaran,
Junior Telecom Offier,
O/o JTO Groups,
BSNL Telephone Exchange,
Kodavasal, Thiruvarur.
28.T.K. Kumar,
S/o G. Karuppiah,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o General Manager,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
BSNL Complex, Medical College Road,
Thanjavur.
6 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
29.Ms. N. Manjula,
D/o R. Natarajan,
Sub Divisional Engineer`
O/o General Manager,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
BSNL Complex, Medical College Road,
Thanjavur.
30. B. Mariyappan,
S/o A. Balu,
Junior Telecom Officer (Ext-II), Groups
Telephone Exchange,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
Big Mill Street, Tiruvarur.
31.S. Prabakaran,
S/o M.Soundararajan,
Junior Telecom Officer Internal,
O/o Main Telephone Exchange,
1, Marriz Corner, Thanjavur.
32.R. Sammandam,
S/o S. Rethinam,
Junior Telecom Officer (L&B),
O/o General Manager, BSNL,
BSNL Complex,
Medical College Road, Thanjavur.
33.S. Saravanaku\mar,
S/o A. Shanmugasundaram,
Junior Telecom Officer West,
O/o Divisional Engineer External,
SDE West, Eswari Nagar,
Telephone Exchange,
MC Road, Thanjavur.
34.S. SundaraAravazhi,
S/o N. Sundararajan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Sub Divisional Engineer
(Transmission-Maintenance),
Second Floor, Main Telephone Exchange,
No.1, Marriz Corner, Thanjavur.
7 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
35.S. Suresh Kumar,
S/o R. Swaminathan,
Junior Telecom Officer (NWO-CM),
O/o Sub-Divisional Engineer (CM/TX),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
Marys Corner, Thanjavur.
36.J. Vimalraj,
S/o K. Jayakeerthi,
Junior Telecom Officer (MM),
O/o General Manager,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
Medical College Road, Thanjavur.
37.J. Kabilan,
S/o P. Jayabalan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Deputy General Manager (IN),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
DTAX Building, CMTS BSNL,
Trichy.
38.N. Srinivasan,
S/o Narayanasamy Rao M.B.,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Deputy General Manager (IN),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
DTAX Building, CMTS BSNL,
Trichy
39.S. Gobinath,
S/o V. Suriyanarayanan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
O/o Deputy General Manager (B& IT),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
South Zone Nodal Centre,
DTAX Building, 2nd Floor,
Trichy. .. Applicants
By Advocate Mr. Sricharan Rangarajan, Sr. Counsel
for Ms. Anuganesan
8 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
Vs.
1.Union of India
rep by the Secretary,
Department of Telecommunications,
Sanchar Bhawan,
20, Ashoka Road, New Delhi.
2.Union of India
rep by the Secretary,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,
Department of Pensions and Pensioners' Welfare,
New Delhi.
3. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
rep by its Chairman cum Managing Director,
Corporate Office, Bharat Sanchar Bhavan,
Harish Chandra Mathur Lane,
New Delhi.
4. Deputy General Manager(Estt.),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
Establishment IV Section, 5th Floor,
Bharat Sanchar Bhavan,
Corporate Office, Janpath,
New Delhi.
5.The Chief General Manager,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Tamil Nadu Circle,
New Administrative Building,
6th Floor, 16, Creams Road,
Chennai.
6.The General Manager,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) ,
4A Bharathidasan Salai,
Trichy.
9 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
7. The General Manager,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
BSNL Complex, Medical College Road,
Thanjavur.
8.The General Manager (South Zone Nodal Centre),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL),
CMTS, Amenity Block 3rd Floor,
Cantonment, Trichy.
By Advocate Mr. K. Rajendran, SCGSC for R.1 & 2
Mr. M. Kishore Kumar, SPC for R.3 to 8
10 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member) The applicants in the OA seeking the following relief:
" to call the records pertaining to the proceedings issued by the 1st respondent in his proceedings No.27- 1/2001-sng (Vol.III)/Chennai T.C. (Pt.) dated 27.02.2020 and the consequent impugned proceedings issued by the 4th respondent in his proceedings in BSNLCO-A/16(27)/4/2020-ESTAB dated 07.08.2020 and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to grant the applicants benefit under Rule 37A of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 taking into consideration the entire duration of employment of the applicants with the respondents by holding the applicants as "an employee recruited by Department of Telecommunication, absorbed in 3rd Respondent" and pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice."
2. Brief facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants are as follows:
The 1st respondent had issued a Notification No.RET/301-10/2000, dated 29.05.2000, calling for applications for direct recruitment to the cadre of Telecom Technical Assistants (for short TTA). The applicants have applied for the said posts. Though the Examination was conducted by the Department of Telecommunication, pursuant to the New Telecom Policy, 1999 and due to corporatization of the functions of Department of Telecommunication, the provisional selection of the applicants for the post of TTA was issued by the 6th respondent, in July, 2001. The applicant further submits that due to the formational Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, 11 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 (BSNL for short), an Office Memorandum, dated 30.09.2000, was issued by the Ministry of Communication to the effect that the staffs working in various Telecom Circle would stand transferred along with their post on existing terms and conditions, on 'as is where is' basis on deemed deputation with effect from 01.10.2000 i.e., the date of taking over of Telecom operations by the 3rd respondent. It is also stated by them that in the communication for provisional selection issued to the applicants, it was indicated that the scale of pay would be revised in IDA pay scale, which was the same service condition applied for BSNL absorbed employees at that point of time. The applicants' pay was revised from CDA Pay Scale to IDA Pay Scale with effect from 01.10.2000 and in the order, it was also stated that the applicants and similarly placed employees have been absorbed in BSNL with effect from 01.10.2000. The applicants were under the notion that they are holding the position of TTA and the consequent promotional post of Junior Telecom Officer as a BSNL absorbed employee and that after their retirement, they would be paid pension as per CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. However, an order, dated 29.09.2016, was issued by the DoT, stating that the 3 rd respondent has decided to contribute 3% of the Basic Pay + Dearness Allowance of the employees' salary to form a pension fund with effect from 14.06.2016. It is the grievance of the applicants that by the said order, the 15 years continuous service rendered by them will not be counted for payment of 12 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 pension. In this regard, the representation submitted by the applicants individually was rejected by an en masse order, dated 07.08.2020 of the 4th respondent, stating that the similarly placed employees such as the applicants will not be covered under Rule 37A, based on a Circular, dated 27.02.2020, issued by the 1st respondent. Challenging the said orders, the applicants are before us.
3. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sricharan Rengarajan contended that although the applicants have applied for TTA posts under the 1st respondent and took part in the examination conducted by the 1st respondent, neither the 3rd respondent nor the 1st respondent issued any clarification or disclaimer as to the status of the applicants or that they would not be covered under the service conditions of the 1 st respondent. It is further contended that even the bond executed by some of the applicants do not carry any reference or undertaking that their recruitment is solely by the 3rd respondent, or that they would not be treated as DOT employees or that service conditions of the 1 st respondent would not applicable to them.
4. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicants further contended that the laws of contract and service mandate that the recruitment conditions including the employer cannot be altered amidst the recruitment and 13 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 selection process. The offer of appointment having been made by the 1st respondent, and the applicants accepting the said offer, the respondents cannot thereafter alter the agreement between the parties without the consent of the recruits/applicants. Thus the respondents have denied the applicants an opportunity for exercising their options. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel that when the applicants had applied for the post of TTA in the DoT, based on the Notification issued by the DoT and they had also written the examination held in accordance with the DoT TTA Recruitment Rules, 1999. In the said Notification, it is clearly indicated that CDA Pay Scale will be paid to the applicants. Thus, the 1 st and the 3rd respondent had created a legitimate expectation in their minds that the applicants would be treated akin to a Central Government employee under Department of Telecommunications. It is alleged by the learned counsel that the 1st and 3rd respondents had failed to provide the applicant with an option form as stated under the OM, dated 30.09.2000, the scale of pay of the applicants were arbitrarily revised from CDA pay scale to IDA pay scale, without their consent, vide Memo, dated 28.02.2003, of the 3 rd respondent.
5. The learned Senior Counsel referred to sub-clause (5) of amended Rule 37A wherein it is stated that upon absorption of Government servants in the Public Sector Undertaking, the posts which they were 14 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 holding in the Government before such absorption shall stand abolished. Hence, the applicants who had applied for the sanctioned post of TTA in DoT and got the successful selection from BSNL, the posts from DoT got transferred to BSNL making the applicants an 'absorbed employee'. Further, that sub-rule 22 of Rule 37A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, states that when the Telecom Department is converted to BSNL, pension shall be paid by the Government. Hence, the applicants are entitled to pension as per the said Rules.
6. He also referred to the Office Memorandum, dated 17.02.2020, which devised guidelines to provide an one time option to those employees whose selection was finalized but appointment was delayed due to various exigencies, including pendency of litigations, with provision to opt for either the CCS (Pension) Rules or NPS. However, it is pointed out by him that the said OM was modified by a subsequent OM, dated 03.03.2023, of the 2nd respondent. The crux of the OM reads as follows:
"4.The matter has been examined in consultation with the Department of Financial Services, Department of Personnel & Training, Department of Expenditure and Department of Legal Affairs in the light of the various representations/references and decisions of the Courts in this regard. It has now been decided that , in all cases where the Central Government civil employee has been appointed against a post or vacancy which was advertised/notified for recruitment/appointment,0 prior to the date of notification for National Pension 15 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 System i.e., 22.12.2003 and is covered under the National Pension System on joining service on or after 01.01.2004, may be given a one-time option to be covered under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (now 2021), This option may be exercised by the concerned Government servants latest by 31.08.2023."
7. He also assailed the impugned order as arbitrary in as much as the cause of action for the present application arose on account of the arbitrary and illegal rejection of the applicants' representation by the 4 th respondent allegedly under the instructions of the 1 st respondent in 2020. It is further submitted by him that though the representations were filed by all the applicants individually, an en masse rejection order, dated 07.08.2020, was issued by the 4th respondent. The same was neither served upon the applicants individually or collectively, nor brought to their knowledge by the respondents.
8. According to the learned counsel that the respondents are attempting to deny the rightful pensionary and terminal benefits to the applicants by misinterpreting Rule 37A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The said action is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. In this connection, the learned counsel relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Kirpal Singh (2014 (5) SCC 189, Madan Singh Shekhwat Vs. Union of India (1999 (6) SCC 459 and State of Rajasthan Vs. O.P. Gupta (2022 SCC 16 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 OnLine SC 1248). He also relied upon the order, dated 22.01.2010 of the Chandigarh Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Raj Kumar and Jagjit Singh Vs. UOI through its Secretary, Ministry of Communications and others which has been subsequently upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana on 19.08.2010 as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court on 24.01.2011.
9. For the aforesaid reasons, the learned counsel prayed for allowing the OA by quashing of the orders impugned in the OA and grant the benefits under Rule 37A of the Rules to the applicants.
10. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the Cabinet in its Meeting held on 31.08.2000, had approved the DoT's Cabinet Note dated 17.08.2000 regarding corporatization from DTO/DTS to BSNL which was related to the service matters, legal issues, HRD issues, Pension and Retirement benefits, Financial viability, Financial issues, Financial and administrative powers for BSNL, DoT;s role for management of terminal benefits etc. Besides, this, the Cabinet also had approved the Pension Rule 37A which was inserted after Rule 37 and before Rule 38 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The Pension Rule 37A elaborated vide the Cabinet Note with its Annexure-1 and in para it reads as follows:
17 OA No.310/00068 of 2023
"37A Conditions for payment of pension on absorption consequent upon conversion of a Government Department into a Public Sector Undertaking- (1) On conversion of a department of the Central Government into a Public Sector undertaking, all Government servants of that Department shall be transferred en-masse to that Public Sector Undertaking, on terms of foreign service without any deputation allowance till such time as they get absorbed in the said undertaking, and such transferred Government servants shall be absorbed in the Public Sector Undertaking with effect from such date as may be notified by the Government."
According to the learned counsel thus, it is quite clear and unambiguous that the Rule 37A is applicable only to the permanent Government Servants of India under the DoT on dated 30.09.2000 who have been permanently absorbed in the BSNL.
11. The learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that though the recruitment process was initiated but was not carried out and completed by DoT. The whole recruitment process of the exam had been carried out and completed by the BSNL. Further, the applicants had also entered into a Bond Agreement of service with BSNL before accepting the offer of appointment which was also issued by the BSNL and duly accepted by the applicants. The conscious and unconditional entry of the applicants in service bond agreement with BSNL bears testimony to their acceptance of their appointment to the post of TTA in BSNL. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel that the BSNL 18 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 Corporate Officer has also clarified vide their letter, dated 06.05.2008 that the employees whose appointment orders are issued by BSNL will be treated as BSNL employees. The applicants have accepted all terms and conditions mentioned in the Appointment letter and they have not chosen to challenge the terms and conditions. After their appointment in BSNL at TTA, they have accepted the promotions and enjoyed all the financial benefits viz., financial upgradation/perks/allowances/medical facilities etc. When once the applicants have accepted the terms and conditions and also executed a Bond, their claim is hit by the principle of estoppels. In support of the contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on the following decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court:
1. Y.B. Patil and Others Vs. Y.L. Patil (1976 (4) SCC 66.
2. Vijayabai and others Vs. Shriram Tukaram and others (1999 (1) SCC
693.
3. +Hope Plantations Ltd. Vs. Taluk Land Board, Peermade and anothers (1999 (5) SCC 590.
4. Chandra Prakash tiwari & Ors. V. Shakuntala Shukla and others (2002 (6) SCC 127.
12. Regarding applicability of the Rule 37A, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the employees of DoT who exercised their option to be continued in the BSNL, were given the right to pension as a 19 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 Government employee and their membership in the GPF were protected. Likewise, the Government servants under the DoT, who on creation of BSNL, were transferred and permanently absorbed under Rule 37A of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, got entitled to all the protections available thereunder. Whereas the applicants herein who were recruited/appointed/promoted/upgradation orders issued by BSNL are not entitled to the status of DoT employees/DoT employees absorbed in BSNL and cannot claim the benefits under the Rule 37A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.
13. Learned counsel also submitted that the applicants claimed DoT status after a lapse of 19 years of their appointment, after enjoying all the benefits extended by BSNL. In this connection, the learned counsel referred to the order, dated 01.12.2021, of the Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal in the matter of Arif Saeed & 68 others Vs. UOI & Ors. In that case, the applicants who were appointed in the year 2003 in BSNL and after having served for 8 years in the BSNL, claimed the benefits under DoT. The Allahabad Bench after observing that the plea does not deserve even a preliminary consideration dismissed the OA. The Hon'ble High Court of Ranchi in its order, dated 06.11.2022 , in W.P. (S) No.2330 of 2022, in the case of Vikash Kumar Gupta & 67 others Vs. UOI & Others, held that having accepted the offer of appointment and remained under the BSNL for 19/20 years, the applicants therein cannot claim to be 20 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 treated as DoT employee,merely on the ground that the advertisement for recruitment was issued by DoT.
14. In view of the above submission, he prayed that the OA is to be summarily dismissed with heavycost.
15. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the pleadings as well as the written submissions furnished by both the parties along with the judgements relied upon by them.
16. The question that arises for consideration is whether the claim of the applicants that they should be granted the benefits under Rule 37A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, as DoT employee absorbed in BSNL, is to be granted or not.
17. The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) issued a recruitment notification in May 2000 for Telecom Technical Assistants (TTA) positions across Tamil Nadu, with exams conducted in September 2000. Around the same time, the Government of India decided to reorganize Telecom Services, leading to the establishment of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) as a public limited company from 01.10. 2000 onwards. BSNL subsequently took over the recruitment process initiated by DoT, 21 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 including result declarations, appointment procedures, and the implementation of employee benefits. The applicants who successfully joined BSNL did so under specific conditions, including signing service bonds and accepting the terms of their appointment orders. They underwent training and enjoyed benefits provided by BSNL throughout their employment. Now, after almost two decades since their appointment, these applicants are attempting to assert their status as DoT employees, a claim which BSNL contests. BSNL argues that since the entire recruitment process and subsequent employment formalities were carried out under its auspices, and the applicants willingly accepted these conditions without contesting their status as BSNL employees, they cannot now turn roung and seek to be considered as DoT employees.
18. Regarding pension benefits under Rule 37-A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, this rule was inserted just before BSNL's formation. It specifically benefits employees who were originally recruited by DoT and later absorbed into BSNL upon its creation, provided they opted for absorption. Those who did not opt were reverted back to DoT. Rule 37-A offers significant advantages such as retaining government employee status, pension benefits, and protection of contributions to the General Provident Fund (GPF). Since the applicants were appointed, promoted, and upgraded entirely within BSNL without raising objections or 22 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 contesting their employment under BSNL regulations, they do not qualify as DoT employees or DoT-absorbed employees entitled to Rule 37-A benefits. Therefore, they cannot claim to such benefits under these rules.
19. The applicants claim for being treated as DoT employees is based on the fact that the recruitment Notification was issued by the DoT. In this connection, it is more appropriate to refer to the judgment, dated 16.11.2022, of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, in W.P. (S) No.2330 of 2022, relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents. In that judgment, the Hon'ble High Court had dealt with similar claim of the petitioners therein for the grant of DoT status and also the benefits under the Rule 37A of the Rules and concurred with the findings rendered by the order, dated 18.04.2022, of the Circuit Bench of this Tribunal at Ranchi. The relevant portions of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand is extracted as hereunder:
"10. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the pleadings borne from the records. The claim of the petitioners for being treated as DOT employees stems from the only fact that the advertisement for recruitment was issued by the DOT. However, the entire exercise or recruitment was undertaken by the BSNL and applicants also joined the service of BSNL on or around 16.09.2002/30.09.2022 after formation of the BSNL on 01.10.2000. Merely because of the fact that initially some GPF deductions were made from their salary, which was discontinued also, applicants cannot claim a legal 23 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 right to be treated as employees of DOT. On the formation of the BSNL, by a Gazette Notification, dated 30.09.2000(Annexure -R1 to the counter affidavit dated 26.07.2022), the assets and liabilities of the DOT was transferred to the BSNL, which came into existence on 01.10.2000. Petitioners' cause of action, if any, related to the time when they had joined BSNL. Having accepted the offer of appointment and remained under the BSNL for 10.20 years, only account of rejection of representation dated 21.09.2021, they cannot revive a stale claim of cause of action. No legitimate expectation can either accrue as their recruitment, appointment and joining and all subsequent events having been taken place under BSNL organization.
11. In view of the aforesaid reasons and facts and circumstances noted herein above, we do not find any error in the impugned order of the learned CAT. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed."
20. Admittedly, in the instant case also, though the recruitment process was initiated by the DoT, the whole recruitment process of the examination, i.e., declaration of result and completion of pre-appointment formalities and conduction of pre-appointment training and appointment thereof etc., and further promotion/upgradation had been carried out and completed by BSNL. The applicants have never challenged their appointment in BSNL as TTA. Having accepted the offer of appointment and enjoyed all the financial benefits as BSNL employees, all these years, they cannot revive a stale claim on rejection of their representations. As rightly held by the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, cited 24 OA No.310/00068 of 2023 supra, no legitimate expectation can either accrue as their recruitment, appointment and joining and all subsequent events having been taken place under BSNL Organization.
21. The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, cited supra squarely applicable to the present OA. The applicants miserably failed to make out a case for the relief prayed by them. Hence, the OA is liable to be dismissed and it is, dismissed, accordingly. No order as to costs.
(M. SWAMINATHAN)
MEMBER(J)
mas 26 .07.2024