Telangana High Court
WP/26172/2007 of K. Amarender Babu, Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, on 24 December 2008
SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 26172 of 2007 Oral order: The petitioners, who are working as Stenographers with the respondents-Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), have filed this writ petition questioning the order dated 20.08.2007, issued by the 2nd respondent, namely the Chairman
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANAW.P. No. 26172 of 2007
Oral order:
The petitioners, who are working as Stenographers with therespondents-Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), have filed thiswrit petition questioning the order dated 20.08.2007, issued by the 2[nd]respondent, namely the Chairman and Managing Director of BSNL, asillegal and arbitrary, and consequently to set aside the same.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on thebasis of the impugned order, the Assistant General Manager workingin the Office of the 3[rd] respondent, namely the Chief General Manager,has issued orders dated 22.10.2007, informing the concerned thathaving regard to the impugned orders issued by the 2[nd] respondent,the ACP promotion orders given to the Stenographers in the referencecited therein, are cancelled, and accordingly directed them to regulatethe pay of the said individuals and recover the overpayments, if any,and report compliance. The learned counsel for the petitionerssubmitted that the 2[nd] respondent issued the impugned order,withdrawing the benefit of upgradation of their pay scales under theACP scheme without issuing any notice to the petitioners and that toobased on the clarification issued vide orders dated 12.09.2005, whichis illegal and arbitrary. He submitted that similarly situated personsworking in the States of Kerala and Tamilnadu, filed writ petitionsquestioning the impugned orders before the respective High Courts,which disposed of the said writ petitions, treating the impugned orderas show cause notice, entitling the petitioners therein to submit theirobjections thereto, and directed the respondents therein to consider such objections and pass fresh orders. He submitted that since thepetitioners are questioning the same impugned order, the present writpetition also be disposed of by and in terms of the orders of the Keralaand Tamilnadu High Courts.
The respondents filed counter. The learned Standing Counselfor the respondents contended that the benefit given to the petitionersunder the ACP scheme has not been withdrawn. He submitted thatthe petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of upgradation, butinasmuch as the said benefit was granted to the petitionersinadvertently vide proceedings dated 22.03.2005, and without a viewto rectify the mistake, the same was cancelled. She however, admittedthat the said order has been passed without issuing any notice to thepetitioners.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learnedStanding Counsel for the respondents.
Admittedly, the orders dated 20.08.2007, were passed withoutissuing any notice to the petitioners. The said order, admittedly, wasquestioned by some employees working in the State of Kerala andTamilnadu before the High Courts of Kerala and Tamilnadu by filingwrit petitions, and the said Courts in W.P. No. (C) No. 28989 of 2007,vide orders dated 29.05.2008 and W.P. No. 5789 of 2008, vide ordersdated 23.10.2008 respectively, have disposed of the same treating theimpugned order as show cause notice, entitling the petitioners tosubmit their explanation thereto and directed the respondents thereinto consider the matter and pass appropriate orders afresh. Hence,following the same, this writ petition is also disposed of with thefollowing directions:
The impugned order dated 20.08.2007, issued by the 2[nd] respondent shall be treated as show cause notice, entitling the petitioners to submit their explanation thereto, within a period of fourweeks from today, and upon the petitioners submitting theirexplanation, the respondents are directed to consider the same in passorder afresh, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeksthereafter. Since the order dated 22.10.2007, has been passed by the3[rd] respondent, on the basis of the order dated 20.08.2007, the sameshall be kept in abeyance until the respondents consider and passappropriate orders on the explanation to be submitted by thepetitioners to the orders dated 20.0-8.2007, which is directed to betreated as show cause notice.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Date: 24[th] December, 2008.KSR
_________________
N.V. RAMANA, J.