Dismissed

BSNL and Anr. v. Raj Kumar and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Aug 2010CWP/14802/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed writ petitions filed by the Petitioner and its officers challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's order. The Tribunal had held that compassionate appointees absorbed by BSNL are entitled to the GPF Scheme benefits under a 2001 notification and a 2005 clarification.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions filed by BSNL and its officers were dismissed, upholding the Tribunal's order granting GPF Scheme benefits to employee-respondents.

BSNL and Anr. Vs Raj Kumar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

C.W.P. No. 14802-CAT of 2010 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

C.W.P. No. 14802-CAT of 2010 Date of Decision 19.08.2010

BSNL and another

-----Petitioners

Versus

Raj Kumar & others ---Respondents

¶8

C.W.P. No. 14817-CAT of 2010

BSNL and another

-----Petitioners

Versus

Central Administrative Tribunal & others ---Respondents

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶14

Present: Mr. D.R. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶15

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶16

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶17

M.M. KUMAR, J.

¶18

This is a batch of two writ petitions filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (for brevity 'the B.S.N.L.') and its officers challenging the view taken by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (for brevity 'the Tribunal') in its order dated 22.01.2010 while disposing of three applications filed by the employees of the B.S.N.L. These employees had claimed in their individual Original Applications before the Tribunal that after their compassionate appointment in the department of Tele

¶19

C.W.P. No. 14802-CAT of 2010 -2-

¶20

Communication, which was later on taken over by the B.S.N.L. They were absorbed by the B.S.N.L. in Group 'C' and 'D' subject to the conditions of absorption as given in the notification dated 02.01.2001 (Annexure P-2). The notification stipulated that the casual labourers/ temporary status mazdoors who were regularized or persons who were appointed by the B.S.N.L. on compassionate ground on or after 01.10.2000, as nominees of the employees who died-in-harness upto 30.09.2000, were to come under the GPF Scheme and not under the EPF/CPF Scheme. The clarification issued in 2005 (Annexure P-3) reiterated the aforesaid notification dated 02.01.2001 (Annexure P- 2).

¶21

The employee-respondents had exercised their options for absorption in the B.S.N.L. as required. The Tribunal after setting out the pleadings of the parties held that persons appointed by the B.S.N.L. on compassionate ground on or after 01.10.200 as nominess of the employees of DOT/DTS/ DTO and who died-in-harness upto 30.09.2000 were to be covered under the GPF Scheme. The Tribunal further observed that the clarification has never been withdrawn by the respondents till date. The aforesaid category of persons covered by the instructions are a class by themselves. The order to the contrary dated 08.08.2008 withdrawing the benefits has been rightly quashed by the Tribunal.

¶22

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the paper book, we are of the considered view that no exception is provided to interfere in the view taken by the Tribunal.

¶23

C.W.P. No. 14802-CAT of 2010

¶24

-3-

¶25

The employee-respondents are covered by the instructions dated 02.01.2001, which has been reiterated in the year 2005. Therefore, the employee-respondents would be entitled to benefit of GPF Scheme.

¶26

As a sequel to the above discussions, the writ petitions fail and the same are dismissed.

¶27

A photocopy of this order be placed on the file on

¶28

connected case.

¶29

(M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE

¶30

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE

¶31

August 19, 2010 Atul

BSNL and Anr. v. Raj Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

BSNL and Anr. v. Raj Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Rani & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Surender Chopra & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Manpreet Kaur & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Amritsar Labour Laws Practitioners' Association Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

BSNL and Anr. Vs Central Administrative Tribunal and Ors.

State of Punjab and Ors. Vs Parkash Kaur